Minerals and Sustainability - Exploring Cross-Scale Issues and Responses

Abstract

The ways in which Australia's minerals resources are used to support sustainable futures merits serious and broad discussion. This paper reviews the issues associated with minerals and sustainability and the contemporary responses to these issues by stakeholders at the global, national and local scale. A framework for integrating minerals and sustainability - the Mineral Resources Landscape - is used to map the contemporary issues and stakeholder activities relative to each other and provides a platform for discussion of further research questions required to position the Australian minerals sector as 'metals service provider' in a sustainable future. This research begins part of a three year 'Mineral Futures' collaboration between universities and CSIRO exploring commodity futures, technology futures and mineral-rich regions in transition.

Full text

MINERAL FUTURES DISCUSSION PAPER:
SUSTAINABILITY ISSUES, CHALLENGES
AND OPPORTUNITIES
Cluster research report 1.1
Prepared by
Instute for Sustainable Futures
University of Technology, Sydney
and
Centre for Social Responsibility in Mining
Sustainable Minerals Instute
University of Queensland
For
CSIRO Minerals Down Under Flagship
Instute for Sustainable Futures
University of Technology, Sydney
PO Box 123
Broadway, NSW, 2007
© UTS 2009

Authors:
Damien Giurco
Geo Evans
Carlia Cooper
Leah Mason
Daniel Franks
Final Report
27 October 2009
MINERAL FUTURES DISCUSSION PAPER:
SUSTAINABILITY ISSUES, CHALLENGES
AND OPPORTUNITIES

Mineral Futures Discussion Paper October 2009
3
ABOUT THE AUTHORS
Institute for Sustainable Futures, UTS
The Institute for Sustainable Futures (ISF) was established by the University of Technology,
Sydney in 1996 to work with industry, government and the community to develop sustainable
futures through research and consultancy. Our mission is to create change toward sustainable
futures that protect and enhance the environment, human well-being and social equity. We
seek to adopt an inter-disciplinary approach to our work and engage our partner organisations
in a collaborative process that emphasises strategic decision-making.
For further information visit www.isf.uts.edu.au
Research team:
Dr Damien Giurco, Research Director;
Geoff Evans, Senior Research Consultant;
Carlia Cooper, Research Assistant and PhD scholar;
Leah Mason, Research Assistant.
Centre for Social Responsibility in Mining, University of Queensland
The Centre for Social Responsibility in Mining (CSRM) was established by the University of
Queensland in 2001 in response to growing interest in and debate about the role of the mining
and minerals industry in contemporary society. As a centre within the Sustainable Minerals
Institute, CSRM has contributed to industry change processes through leading research, post-
graduate teaching, professional education, research-orientated consulting and pro-bono work.
CSRM has global reach, with particular experience in Australia and the Asia-Pacific region.
For further information visit www.csrm.uq.edu.au
Research team:
Dr Daniel Franks, Research Fellow.
CITATION
Cite this report as:
Giurco, D., Evans, G., Cooper C., Mason, L., Franks, D. (2009). Mineral Futures Discussion Paper:
Sustainability Issues, Challenges and Opportunities. Prepared for CSIRO Minerals Down Under
Flagship, by the Institute for Sustainable Futures (University of Technology, Sydney) and the
Centre for Social Responsibility in Mining, Sustainable Minerals Institute (University of
Queensland).
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
This research has been undertaken as part of the Minerals Futures Research Cluster, a
collaborative program between the Australian CSIRO (Commonwealth Scientific Industrial
Research Organisation); The University of Queensland; The University of Technology, Sydney;
Curtin University of Technology; CQ University; and The Australian National University. The
authors gratefully acknowledge the contribution each partner and the CSIRO Flagship
Collaboration Fund. The Minerals Futures Cluster is a part of the Minerals Down Under
National Research Flagship. Special thanks are extended to Prof. Daniela Stehlik (Research
Centre for Stronger Communities, Curtin University), Dr. Brett Cohen (The Green House, South
Africa) and Tim Prior (Institute for Sustainable Futures, UTS) for their detailed review and
comments.

Mineral Futures Discussion Paper October 2009
4
CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 6
1. INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW 11
1.1. Relationship to other projects 11
1.2. Outline of document 11
2. CONTEXT, DRIVERS AND FUTURES 13
2.1. Context 13
2.2. Global and local drivers 14
2.3. Industry response to drivers 22
2.4. The mineral resources landscape: an integrating framework 24
2.5. Futures studies: what role for resources? 26
2.6. Summary: global drivers and futures 33
3. COMMODITY FUTURES 34
3.1. Production trends & forecasts 34
3.2. Consumption trends & downstream roadmaps 40
3.3. Material flow analysis 42
3.4. Environmental sustainability: minerals & metals 45
3.5. Challenges: commodity futures 49
4. TECHNOLOGY FUTURES 50
4.1. Technology reflects socio-ecological relationships 50
4.2. Upstream industry road maps 51
4.3. Emerging extraction technologies 52
4.4. Technology futures assessment 53
4.5. Challenges: technology futures 55
5. REGIONS IN TRANSITION 56
5.1. Sustainability and regional futures 56
5.2. How do resource-rich regions think about and plan for their futures? 59
5.3. Challenges: regions in transition 62
6. DISCUSSION QUESTIONS 63
REFERENCES 65

Mineral Futures Discussion Paper October 2009
5
FIGURES
FIGURE 1: Outline of discussion paper .....................................................................................12
FIGURE 2: Minerals system on the weak-strong sustainability spectrum..................................15
FIGURE 3: The mineral resources landscape ...........................................................................24
FIGURE 4: Ecological footprint versus earth’s carrying capacity illustrating ‘overshoot’
from the late 1970’s. ..............................................................................................27
FIGURE 5: Production increase required by 2020 to meet demand .........................................36
FIGURE 6: Australian iron ore production (a) and global market share (b) forecast under
‘holding the line’ scenario ......................................................................................37
FIGURE 7: Australian iron ore production under 3 scenarios ...................................................38
FIGURE 8: European aluminium flow 2004 .............................................................................43
FIGURE 9: Operational phases and stages of production & consumption cycle .......................45
FIGURE 10: Stages of the production-consumption cycle .........................................................46
TABLES
Table 1: Future industry drivers ranked by AusIMM members ................................................23
Table 2: Description of key variables governing the Mineral Resources Landscape .................25
Table 3: Contrasting agents for change set forth in the Great Transition essay,
with implications for mineral futures ........................................................................31
Table 4: Australian energy and mineral exports ......................................................................35
Table 5: Gold outlook .............................................................................................................35

Mineral Futures Discussion Paper October 2009
6
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Background and aim
Minerals and metals will continue to play an important role in underpinning the future
prosperity of our society. However, to confront the challenge of sustainability, the way in
which resources are currently used, and might usefully be used in future, merits serious and
broad discussion. This paper explores the background issues relating to mineral futures as a
first step in the three-year research program of the Mineral Futures Collaboration Cluster – a
collaborative program between the Australian CSIRO (Commonwealth Scientific Industrial
Research Organisation); The University of Queensland; The University of Technology, Sydney;
Curtin University of Technology; CQ University; and The Australian National University.
Strategic questions, around which the paper is framed are:
 What global and local drivers are likely to influence the future use of minerals?
 How are commodity futures currently studied and understood?
 How adequate are attempts to close the loop
1
and other industry responses to
sustainability drivers?
 How integrated is the minerals and metals product value chain when considering
manufacture, use and disposal, or reuse and recycling of finished goods?
 What future role is seen for new technology in the minerals industry, and how are
these technologies evaluated?
 How do communities plan for the future in resource-rich regions and how do they
cope when the resources are depleted?
 What important cross-scale interactions between regions, technologies and
commodity cycles need to be considered to address sustainability?
The ultimate aim of this discussion paper is to catalyse discussion – not just about how the
minerals industry can be more sustainable, but rather, what an industry would look like which
is an integral part of a sustainable society. How will the influences from globalisation and
climate change affect the future of minerals? Should Australian industry structure its future
business to focus primarily on resource extraction or include considerations of resource
stewardship? Should technological innovation be paying more attention to recycling
technologies in addition to minerals processing technologies? How can the communities of
minerals-rich regions be made more resilient to future changes in the mineral industry?
These questions help frame the discussion on how to realise long term national benefit from
Australia’s mineral resources. Together with companion papers on foresight processes, this
document will be used to inform the research pursued within the CSRIO Mineral Futures
Initiative and Collaboration Cluster; in particular, the foresight processes used and how it links
with the Cluster’s projects on commodity futures, technology futures and regions in transition.
Reviewing drivers and futures research
Our paper begins with an overview of drivers that both affect the long-term structure of the
industry and contribute to future uncertainty. These drivers include climate change
(minimising impacts, adapting to constraints and realising opportunities); renewing social
licence to operate with new practices, technologies and locations; responding proactively to
the constraints and opportunities posed by Peak Oil and Peak Minerals (including increasing
1
An economy in which any industrial outputs are recycled to create other products to conserve resources

Mineral Futures Discussion Paper October 2009
7
costs and impacts as lower grade ores are processed); and issues of governance and social
aspirations for strong sustainability.
Some of these drivers are industry specific and others affect the whole economy. A review of
two prominent foresight projects: the Limits to Growth studies (Meadows et al., 1972, 1974,
1992, 2004), and the Stockholm Environment Institute’s Great Transitions (Raskin et al., 2002),
illustrate how uncertain drivers may be considered in long-term futures and also highlight the
central focus that resources take when considering alternative futures. These broad
conceptualisations of the future raise the issue of dematerialisation of the economy as a key
issue for sustainable development.
A transition to a sustainable society is likely to highlight the role of new social values and more
effective governance regimes to institutionalise sustainability principles. Issues such as
reduced and more equitable global consumption, corporate social responsibility, the
internalisation of the real social and environmental costs of goods and services are likely to be
on-going, and increasingly urgent, topics of discussion. The prospect of a more dematerialised
economy and closed-loop production/consumption cycles have consequences for commodity
futures, technological innovation and the sustainability of mineral-rich regions.
How is future commodity use studied and understood?
This question was asked to assess how the long term thinking in respect to commodity
extraction, processing and use is currently understood. What information and processes are
used to inform future decisions? What deficiencies in current approaches could be addressed
through the Cluster’s research?
Production and demand forecasts dominate the futures thinking concerning minerals and
metals – where increases in both are viewed as favourable. The future potential of reused and
recycled metal in meeting demand receives relatively little attention, though some academic
literature on Material Flows Analysis (showing stocks and flows of metals in ores, in use and in
discarded scrap) gives some voice to this critical issue. Whilst such analysis is intended to guide
policy, there are no examples of it doing so in Australia. In a world with growing resource,
water, energy and carbon constraints it is prudent to consider how Australia might play a
strategic role in minerals futures as a leading centre of minerals stewardship and recycling, not
just as a major centre for minerals extraction. This may be a particularly critical issue for the
strategic management of rare and high-value minerals that are essential for future
technologies.
Many mid-term commodity forecasts (5–10 years) optimistically assume continuous growth in
minerals demand, but the longer-term focus (50 years) taken in this work must necessarily
consider other scenarios.
Remaining questions not adequately addressed in the literature include:
 How might changes in end-uses for minerals (for example, if world energy adopts large
scale solar, hydrogen, nuclear or wind) cause changes in the demand for, and
profitability of, particular minerals and attractiveness of different technologies?
 How might the shift towards greater recycling and reclamation technologies impact on
the business model for minerals companies (might they become metal service
providers who rent the metal)?
 How could carbon emission reductions and fuel costs affect mineral wealth by
constraining extraction processes?
 What will the minerals industry look like if global mineral consumption declines or
increases?

Mineral Futures Discussion Paper October 2009
8
 What effect will Peak Oil have on mineral futures (including changed patterns of
transport and international trade)?
 How can traditional mineral exporting countries, such as Australia, maintain a strategic
influence as a minerals ‘superpower’ if there is a shift from ‘virgin ore’ to high levels of
product stewardship creating an increasingly large pool of resources for use in new
and existing product lines that are located outside of this country (e.g. Japan). In a
recent speech in Western Australia, the former chief scientist of the Australian Federal
Government, Dr Robin Batterham, sees this occurring within fifty years (Batterham,
2009).
 How will market liberalisation, a pattern that has been occurring in key world
provinces over the past fifty years (including Indonesia, Philippines, Chile), affect
industry access to resources?
 What future political constraints might influence access to the quality and quantity of
resources? How might this access be affected by discussions concerning ‘free, prior,
informed consent’, greater recognition of indigenous sovereignty, or by approaches to
‘conflict resources’?
Minerals and environmental sustainability
At present, activities towards addressing environmental sustainability with respect to minerals
and metals are often limited to reducing energy and water inputs per tonne of product (rather
than in absolute terms), and to ensuring mined land rehabilitation on-site. The need for a
holistic and integrated approach to stewardship along the whole production and consumption
cycle is recognised in industry visions, but remains limited in substantive implementation. This
paper argues that the environmental dimensions of a sustainable minerals industry must be
considered throughout the metal extraction, processing, use and reuse stages of the minerals
system, in addition to the common focus on operational stages of mining and minerals
processing. Importantly, these considerations should be made alongside considerations of the
economic and social aspects of sustainability, which are discussed in detail by Schandl and
Daras (2008).
Technology futures: innovation, assessment and policy
Technology futures are linked to societal and human-nature relationships and values. As the
societal aspiration for sustainability progresses, principles promoting inter-generational and
intra-generational equity ought to increasingly inform technology research and development
choices and investments.
Technology roadmaps feature heavily as a foresight technique regarding minerals, with a focus
on which technologies will open up previously inaccessible resources at reduced cost and
impacts. There is little focus on the future of recycling or other technologies that could open
up new profit points along the production consumption chain.
If companies are to profit from a dematerialised economy, technologies that incorporate
design for environmental principles, which support closed-loop life cycles involving reuse and
recycling, must be a focus of technological innovation.
Technologies that reduce landscape disturbance and pollution, and the energy, carbon and
water-intensity of mining and minerals processing will become increasingly strategic for
achieving sustainability in the minerals industry.

Mineral Futures Discussion Paper October 2009
9
The acceptability of novel technologies (such as carbon capture and storage, submarine
tailings disposal, in-situ leach and deep sea mining) will influence whether these, or alternative
technologies, emerge as components required to realise a sustainable minerals future.
Technology Futures Assessment offers promise in shaping technology design to enhance
environmental and community outcomes, but uptake to date has been slow in Australia. Public
participation is critical to increasing the likelihood that the technologies under development
will be acceptable to the community and be taken up by industry and governments.
Other issues yet to be addressed include the ability of the Australian minerals industry to
remain influential and profitable in light of potential shifts in the commodity mix (for example,
bulk commodities or higher value niche commodities), or in relation to the emergence of
product stewardship drivers in the international economy.
Regions in transition
Regional futures were reviewed to explore current and emerging issues at the regional and
community scales, and how planning for the future is undertaken at these scales. Cross-scale
interactions from key global drivers (such as climate change, the global economy and Peak Oil)
will extend their influence into mineral-rich regions and local communities will increasingly
confront pressing social and environmental issues.
An integrated process of regional planning and governance are critical for the sustainability of
resource-rich regions. Considerations include how to empower affected communities
(Indigenous and non-indigenous) to ensure they are given avenues to gain meaningful
involvement in determining their futures.
Currently, regional planning by governments focuses on issues of economics, housing,
population and environment. Peak industry bodies have considered infrastructure
requirements to realise increased commodity trade, but individual projects also require
detailed environmental and social impact assessments. Integrated planning at the mine site
has focussed on connections between catchment and social management planning with the
corresponding regional plans (see for example in Queensland, Sustainable Resource
Communities Policy). However, further work is required to integrate sustainability planning for
regions, with a focus on ensuring long term prosperity linked to a detailed understanding of
technology and commodity futures.
The geographic, temporal and spatial boundaries within which regional futures are assessed
are global and long-term, and not restricted to the life of a mine, the mineral processing phase
or waste disposal operations. Nor is it limited just to those stakeholders in place, but also
extends to others with an interest (including future generations). Discussion must extend to
planning for sustainable social and environmental benefits in mining regions post-mining –
where minerals industry operations leave a positive legacy to the region or community. These
considerations extend well beyond the lifespan of the mining or minerals processing
operation.
Unanswered questions for resource-rich regions include: how to manage and govern mineral-
rich regions to achieve sustainability through boom-bust cycles? How can affected
communities enjoy long-term benefits from the wealth extracted while protecting local
environments, and maintaining well-being and healthy community life (including traditional
values and cultures) when confronted with mining development? How does the agency
afforded by devolved or centralised decision-making affect outcomes for the region or
community? What are the institutional arrangements associated with land use change at a

Mineral Futures Discussion Paper October 2009
10
regional scale and how can these be best integrated to achieve sustainable outcomes
(particularly when considering the cumulative impacts of mining at the regional scale)?
Further discussion must also consider how to plan for a ‘just transition’ to an alternative
economy in post-mining situations in order to protect the wellbeing of displaced workers and
affected communities.
Over-arching questions for discussion
The specific issues discussed in the paper, and which have been identified above, highlight that
there are many complex issues that must be included in the discussion about minerals futures
in Australia. These include:
 What characteristics of the minerals industry might direct the potential approach to
futures research within the Mineral Futures Cluster?
 How can futures research within the Cluster recognise the dynamic and complex socio-
ecological systems that the minerals industry is located in, particularly the inherent
capacity for surprise, uncertainty and discontinuity in these systems?
 How adequately can ‘futures thinking’ consider the impacts of interactions across
spatial and temporal scales, and across ecological, social, economic and political
domains of complex systems like those concerning the minerals industry?
 On what points do different stakeholders and perspectives align and diverge with
respect to sustainability? Where do we need consensus and how do we incorporate a
diversity of views?
 What would enable current approaches used for long-term planning (i.e. forecasting)
to more adequately acknowledge the main uncertainties described in this paper –
ecosystem distress and collapse, climate change, post-oil society, more or less
globalisation, dematerialisation, societal transformation to a steady-state economy?
 How could the minerals industry be profitable in a more dematerialised economy with
a focus on using and reusing metals to provide services?
 Which commodities and technologies are compatible with such societies?
 Which technologies can realise new profit opportunities in a closed-loop
economy?
 At what scale should we seek to close the loop? For which commodities?
 How would Australia develop a leadership role?
 What local, national and global governance mechanisms need to be in place to more
effectively empower and protect the well-being and sustainability of communities in
resource-rich regions?

Mineral Futures Discussion Paper October 2009
11
1. INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW
To develop Australia’s long-term prosperity, we need to better understand the roles that our
minerals resources can usefully play in supporting economies of the future, including our own.
This paper reviews the futures-oriented research that has been undertaken regarding mineral
resources: with respect to global drivers, commodity cycles and their impacts, with respect to
the role of technological innovation, and with respect to regional futures in mineral-rich
communities. We identify points of agreement and dissent, prevailing themes and unanswered
questions as a basis for informing discussion and future research.
This work is funded by the CSIRO Mineral Futures initiative within the Minerals Down Under
Flagship and will be used to inform the research of the Flagship Collaboration Cluster
comprising the University of Queensland (Centre for Social Responsibility in Mining at the
Sustainable Minerals Institute), University of Technology, Sydney (Institute for Sustainable
Futures), Curtin University of Technology (Research Centre for Stronger Communities), Central
Queensland University, Australian National University and CSIRO, as well as inform future
engagement with stakeholders.
1.1. RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER PROJECTS
This discussion paper is being developed in parallel with six companion papers:
(1) Foresighting for mineral futures (Prof. Ron Johnston, University of Sydney);
(2) Overview of scenario process stages (Prof. Ron Johnston, University of Sydney);
(3) Applications foresight approaches outside minerals (Dr. Chris Riedy, ISF);
(4) Stakeholder discussion paper (Dr. Kieren Moffat, CSIRO)
(5) Australian minerals industry in a global context (Dr. Heinz Schandl, CSIRO)
(6) Neighbour of Choice Partnership Model (Dr. Amma Buckley, Curtin University)
These discussion papers will be used collectively, together with this paper describing the
minerals context, to develop the approach to foresight work pursued in the Cluster.
The research conducted in the Mineral Futures Cluster has been grouped into three themes
(which will be informed by the findings of this discussion paper):
 Project 1: Commodity Futures
 Project 2: Technology Futures
 Project 3 Regions in Transition
In addition to the cluster research, CSIRO researchers are conducting related work as part of
the CSIRO Mineral Futures initiative within the Minerals Down Under Flagship.
1.2. OUTLINE OF DOCUMENT
This discussion paper is divided into six sections as shown in Figure 1, overleaf. Following this
introductory section, Section 2 identifies the global ecological, social and economic context in
which the Australian minerals industry is located and discusses some of the key global drivers
that are likely to influence the trajectory of the socio-ecological system in which the industry
operates. To assess the ways in which complexity and uncertainties can be incorporated into
long-term futures, two significant studies with implications for minerals futures are discussed:
the Limits to Growth reports and the Great Transitions scenarios. Industry responses to
sustainability drivers are outlined and a Mineral Resources Landscape framework is proposed

Mineral Futures Discussion Paper October 2009
12
as an integrating framework for understanding current and future activities that will promote
sustainable metal cycles.
Section 3 discusses how commodity futures are studied and understood. It examines
production and demand trends and forecasts, Material Flow Analysis and the environmental
impact of operational phases at a mine site, and material flows along the production-
consumption life cycle. The information and approaches used to inform future decision-
making is explored, together with the underlying values fundamental to these approaches. The
section highlights the need for a more integrated approach to assessing the future role of the
Australian minerals industry in a less materially-intense, more closed-loop and carbon-
constrained society.
Figure 1: Outline of discussion paper
Technology futures are discussed in Section 4, which locates technology within the socio-
ecological landscape. The section examines upstream technology roadmaps – where minerals
come from, and the implications in developing emergent technologies for minerals extraction,
processing and refining. It also looks at downstream technology roadmaps – where do
minerals go? Downstream roadmaps take two distinctive forms: one identifies existing
markets and products that utilise particular minerals; the second attempts to identify new
products and use materials in new ways (e.g. lithium batteries in electric vehicles). Drivers for
technologies for a less materials-intensive society are also examined, and the dearth of
dematerialisation- and recycling-focussed roadmaps are noted. Key emergent minerals
processing technologies are outlined and the process for their evaluation (technology futures
assessment) is discussed and critiqued. The section concludes with a discussion of technology
policy and its role in influencing minerals use and technology futures.
Section 5 discusses some of the key sustainability issues affecting the future of minerals-rich
regions and how regions themselves plan for the future. This discussion extends to how
regions will respond to global drivers such as climate change, the effect of new technologies
1. Mineral Futures Discussion Paper Outline
2.
Context
Drivers
Futures
Local &
Global
Drivers
Industry
Response
Mineral
Resources
Landscape
Iconic
Futures
Studies
3.1 Production forecasts
Resources, Primary, Secondary
3.2 Demand forecasts & downstream
roadmaps changing applications & use
3.3 Material Flow Analysis across production and consumption
current snapshots and models of future scenarios
3.4 Minerals approach to environmental sustainability
At mine site Along production and consumption cycle
3.5 Challenges
and discussion of
future research
questions
4.1 Production Technology / Upstream
technology roadmaps
4.2 Emerging extraction
technologies
technology roadmaps
4.5 Challenges
(i.e. no link to
commodity and
regional futures)
4.3 Technology
Futures
Assessment
5.1 Sustainability and regional futures
5.2 How do resource-rich regions conceptualise and plan for their future?
5.3 Challenges
(i.e. no integration
with
technology,
commodity futures)
Downstream technology futures
already covered in 3.2
4. Technology Futures
5. Regions in Transition
3. Commodity Futures
Scenarios
Discussion
Papers
Which
scenarios and
processes are
being used?
What are the
strengths and
weaknesses
of each?
Which scenario processes
should be used in cluster?
6. Mineral
Futures
Discussion
Paper
Analysis
How is the
minerals
industry
approaching
the future?
Which
further
research
questions
need to be
addressed?
Links to cluster research
P1 P3P2
4.4 Technology policy
&
transitions
Other
Research
Papers
-Stakeholder
-Economic &
Social

Mineral Futures Discussion Paper October 2009
13
on local minerals industry futures, how minerals-rich regions can capture more of the wealth
generated from them and make transitions to sustainable futures in response to changing
ecological, social and economic environments and pressures. The section concludes by
identifying a range of issues that continue to be, or are emerging as, critical ecological and
social sustainability issues that affect the mineral industry’s social licence to operate, including
the impacts of mining in Indigenous communities.
Section 6 draws together the points of agreement and tension across commodity, technology
and regional futures. It then frames a series of questions, based on the remaining tensions and
identified research gaps that can be used to prompt further discussion of where, and how in a
changing world, Australian society will realise national benefit from its mineral endowment
and its mining, minerals processing and recycling activities. Finally, some thoughts are put
forward for discussion regarding how complexity, cross-scale interactions and uncertainty can
be better understood and managed for in information systems and policy.
2. CONTEXT, DRIVERS AND FUTURES
DRIVERS AND FUTURES OUTLINE
This section explores the global context in which current discussions about the future of
minerals is occurring (2.1) and identifies key system drivers that work at global, national and
local scales (2.2). These drivers include the social movement towards sustainability and the
integration of sustainability across ecological, social and economic domains, climate change,
Peak Oil and peak minerals, industry consolidation, the pressures for corporate social
responsibility, and for eco-efficiency and dematerialisation.
Industry responses to these drivers and issues are summarised (2.3) and the Mineral Resources
Landscape is proposed as an integrating framework for considering drivers that affect the
industry and identifying leverage points for responses (2.4). Having identified these drivers (and
their associated uncertainty), future scenarios that anticipate change based on current or
emergent properties of complex socio-ecological systems are reviewed (2.5); both to see how
futures processes can be used to manage uncertainty and to show how mineral resources are
perceived and located within comprehensive visions of the future.
2.1. CONTEXT
Global demand for minerals has grown rapidly over the last 20 years and the minerals industry
has become a critical component of the modern economy. Over the last two decades the
industry has changed with the emergence of new ecological and social stresses, new
commodities, technologies and regional pressures.
With more of the world’s population now living in cities than not, the material intensity of
these livelihoods and the way that resources are managed and recycled in cities has become
increasingly important. This century will witness the rise of the Global Mega-City Region (e.g.
London and the adjoining region of South-east England) with trade between such regions now
shaping patterns of global trade (Pain, 2008). Australia will play important roles in supplying
material resources into east Asia and the Chinese economy, and in supplying the technological
and knowledge services to these and surrounding economies. It should also be highlighted that
rural and regional landscapes in Australia and elsewhere will provide most of the resources
used in these global mega-city regions.

Mineral Futures Discussion Paper October 2009
14
Many factors influence the future of minerals within the complex socio-ecological systems that
operate across linked local, national and global scales. Aiming for resilience and long term
national benefit requires anticipating change, recognising the key drivers that currently, or will
potentially, influence change within the system and acting in response to this insight (Folke et
al., 2002 p 40; Gunderson and Holling, 2002; Walker and Salt, 2006). The next section outlines
the currently identified global and local drivers in the minerals context.
2.2. GLOBAL AND LOCAL DRIVERS
This section identifies key drivers that are likely to be powerful influences on the future of the
minerals industry and are, therefore, critical issues for discussion and research in mineral
future scenarios.
Global drivers in the minerals industry are those characterised by linked ecological, social,
economic and political dimensions. Two key drivers include globalisation and sustainability,
each of which has implications for the planet’s capacity to supply materials and absorb wastes,
limits on human resource consumption patterns, and technology choices. Climate change
(Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 2007a; Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change, 2007b), Peak Oil (Campbell and Laherrère, 1998) and a more comprehensive
understanding of the health of the Earth’s ecosystems on which life depends (Millennium
Ecosystem Assessment, 2005) are also becoming significant drivers for the minerals industry.
Each of these drivers will affect different localities in different ways, particularly through their
impact on water or energy use, or their effect on the location and scale of markets.
2.2.1 Sustainability – weak and strong
The Australian Government's National Strategy for Ecologically Sustainable Development
(NSESD) process recognised ecologically sustainable development (ESD) as the foundation for
sustainability and defined it as:
Using, conserving and enhancing the community's resources so that ecological
processes, on which life depends, are maintained, and the total quality of life, now and in
the future, can be increased (Ecologically Sustainable Development Steering Committee,
1992).
Sustainability, with its goal of intra- and inter-generational equity, is a powerful social driver
influencing discussion and research on minerals futures. The debate about sustainability
extends to a range of views about the extent to which natural capital can be transferred into
financial and human capital. Sustainability can usefully be examined and discussed by
distinguishing between ‘weak’ and ‘strong’ sustainability.
Weak sustainability suggests intergenerational equity is ensured by providing equal
development opportunities for present and future generations. When measuring equity, the
utility of manufactured capital is assumed to be perfectly substitutable with natural capital
(provided, for example, by a healthy environment). Ayres and co-authors (1996) note that
development consistent with weak sustainability can lead to environmental devastation.
Phosphate mining on the Pacific island of Nauru provides a good example of weak
sustainability. Profits from the country’s natural capital, in the form of phosphate, were used
to establish a trust fund that could guarantee the economic sustainability of the country.
However due to unforseen factors (primarily though poor investment choices) this fund was
depleted, and the economic future of the country, once wealthy, is now limited (Gowdy and
McDaniel, 1999).
Strong sustainability advocates assert that manufactured and natural capital are not
interchangeable and that, in fact, human, environmental and economic capital must be
independently sustained through generations (Costanza and Daly, 1992; Daly and Townsend,

Mineral Futures Discussion Paper October 2009
15
1993; Wackernagel et al., 1999). This is referred to as providing 'non-diminishing life
opportunities' (Daly and Cobb, 1989)
2
and requires the maintenance (or improvement) of
ecosystems that support life on Earth. This recognition underpins the need to assess the
environmental impact of human activities, including those that supply metal to the economy.
One point to note is that unlike timber or fisheries, terrestrial mineral resources are rarely a
part of ecosystems, but their removal usually results in disturbance to the natural environment
(Franks et al., 2009).
Figure 2 shows that mineral extraction and processing and use activities, in various
configurations, can be placed at different points on a spectrum of weak and strong
sustainability. It is important to frame what we mean by the term ‘sustainability’ with respect
to the minerals industry and to show that it is not possible to consider a sustainable industry
within an unsustainable economy.
Figure 2: Minerals system on the weak-strong sustainability spectrum
Most raw material extraction and virgin material processing operations are located at the
weak sustainability end of the continuum depicted above. They represent the stage where the
minerals industry converts natural capital into commodities and financial capital (Ayres et al.,
1996). Based on this example, a minerals industry system embedded in a more sustainable
economy must shift its activity to include active stewardship across closed-loop commodity
cycles and metal reuse. It must increasingly seek opportunities to use less metal for service
provision, and thus maximise ecological, social and economic value from mineral resources,
while protecting landscapes, water, biodiversity and other aspects of ecosystems.
2
There is an even stronger position of 'very strong sustainability' linked with the 'deep ecology' philosophy that all life forms have
a right-to-life and should be maintained. This overlooks our current dependence on primary resources and that in the natural
world species and ecosystems are in a constant flux and human activity is itself a part of nature (Ayers et al., 1999).
Weak Sustainability Strong Sustainability
Natural Capital substitutable for Manufactured Capital Natural Capital NOT substitutable
Durables
(Metal dissipated) (Metal not dissipated)
Extraction of Raw Materials (mining)
No Remediation
No Restoration
No Capacity Building (local or regional)
Mineral Processing
(mineral production and production of semi-finished materials)
Remediation
Restoration
Capacity Building (local and regional)
Ore Processing
Recycling
Reuse
Higher Potable Water Use
Higher Non-Renewable Energy Use
Poor Environmental and Human Health Indicators
Lower Water Use
Lower Energy Use
Good Environmental and Human Health Indicators
Single-use product
(Metal dissipated)
Metal Use in Finished Products
(also depends on production -consumption cycle )
(Metal not dissipated)
De-materialisation Avoidance
(e.g. lightweighting)

Mineral Futures Discussion Paper October 2009
16
2.2.2 Sustainability and ecosystem health
The ecosystem health perspective is another frame through which sustainability has been
analysed. It focuses on maintaining or restoring the health of the Earth’s ecosystems through
achieving sustainable human livelihoods, human and animal health, and sustainable cultural
traditions within a symbiotic relation of humans within nature (Rapport et al., 1998; Rapport et
al., 2003). The emergence of widespread and growing ecosystem stress and linked human
health distress attributable to non-sustainable human impacts on the ecosphere, including in
mineral-rich regions (Connor et al., 2004), may cause societies to move from general support
for a relatively weak sustainability model to support for a stronger sustainability paradigm.
Such a shift could potentially have a significant impact on the minerals industry, including the
scale of production and consumption, and access to vital resources (including water) in critical
and vulnerable ecosystems.
2.2.3 Risks associated with climate change
While climate change is a global phenomenon that will have major impacts on ecological,
social and economic sustainability, it will also have highly localised impacts on Australia’s
minerals industry. In 1997, the IPCC noted that because of the size of the minerals industry in
Australia, climate change impacts would have significant consequential effects on the
Australian economy, and that the impacts on minerals industry operations would vary
depending on the scale of change, the environmental conditions at different sites, and the
nature of the operations (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 1997). A decade later,
in its 2007 report on impacts adaptation and vulnerability, the IPCC noted a lack of research on
the impacts of climate change on the Australian mining industry, despite its economic
significance (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 2007b).
These impacts include rising average temperatures affecting the design and operation of
minerals industry processes, and changes to rainfall and evaporation affecting materials
handling. Impacts on the design and operation of infrastructure like mine pits, drainage
systems, tailings and mineral waste disposal systems, roads and railways may also be
impacted. It would also affect supplies of surface and groundwater, the quality and disposal of
wastewater, management of dust and air quality, and site rehabilitation and re-vegetation.
The IPCC reports also noted that storm events, particularly in Northern Australia, could have a
significant impact on soil erosion, tailings stability and re-vegetation growth rates, while
coastal storms and sea level change will have impacts on ports and other materials transport
facilities. The reports also suggested increased insurance and investment risk with the
likelihood of higher premiums would be likely (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change,
1997; Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 2007b).
Mitigation measures to address climate change are likely to have their own impact. These
could include a preference for low-carbon commodities and technologies, and a higher price
on carbon dioxide emissions through carbon taxes and/or emissions cap and trading schemes.
Furthermore, pressure for reducing carbon emissions, higher energy prices and water
conservation in a climate change-affected world will be powerful drivers to encourage
resource conservation, efficiency, recycling and reuse (Young and Sachs, 1994; von Hauff and
Wilderer, 2008).

Mineral Futures Discussion Paper October 2009
17
2.2.4 Environmental constraints, peak minerals and ore grade declines
As Australian ore grades continue to decline, the environmental impact of processing mineral
resources continues to increase (Mudd, 2007). The range of impacts associated with declining
ore grades and peak minerals
3
will also include those relating to costs, technologies and
viability of primary extraction in relation to recycling. The lack of problem awareness and
governance structures to manage peak minerals, like phosphorus for instance, has been
highlighted by (Cordell et al., 2009)
Importantly, the ecological, social and economic health of many minerals industry-affected
regional communities is diminished through loss of ecosystem services when landscapes are
changed and biodiversity lost. Consideration of upstream and downstream sectoral links and
dependencies provides opportunities to evaluate the potential for improving sustainability in
minerals industry affected regions, due to increasing pressure for improved social and
environmental outcomes in these areas. The issue of the legacy of mined land is also
important and recent progress has been made in developing sustainability criteria and an
indicators framework in this area (Worrall et al., 2009).
For instance, the cross-sectoral, ‘triple bottom line’, analysis conducted by the CSIRO, entitled
Balancing Act, provides a broad consideration of the ways in which economic, environmental
and social concerns in one sector can have significant impacts or implications for a range of
other sectors (CSIRO, 2004). The study identified factors that will become likely challenges to
future extraction processes affecting iron ore, bauxite, gold, lead, and a range of other
materials used in construction and agriculture, including:
 High water use;
 High energy use, and;
 Failing to deliver lasting benefits to regional communities in which mining activities
have historically taken place.
The Balancing Act analysis also clearly indicates that the minerals industry presents challenges
to developments in other industry sectors, such as agriculture, with which mining indirectly
competes on the basis of land use and access to resources. Conflicts arising from competition
for limited resources have been demonstrated by clashes between the minerals and
agricultural industries. For example, conflicts in the Hunter and Liverpool Plains with respect to
coal mining and are likely to become more intense as climate change impacts reduce the
quantity and quality of water resources.
Further concern is raised as mining is considered in increasingly remote and vulnerable sites,
such as in Antarctica and the deep seas (Halfar and Fujita, 2002; Littleboy and Boughen, 2007).
Debate regarding these issues raises the possibility of ‘No Go’ mining areas, and the need to
build the capacity of governments and governance regimes to effectively monitor impacts and
limit harm. Such discussion also applies to socially or culturally vulnerable regions.
2.2.5 Resource depletion – contested views
There are contested views on whether we will run out of minerals. A recent debate on
resource depletion has raised the question: what would be the impact of a global up-scaling in
the use of minerals in developing countries to levels consistent with post-industrial nations
(Gordon et al., 2006; Gordon and Tilton, 2008)? Gordon and co-authors note that rates of
3
Peak minerals refers to the point at which production from ore peaks for a particular commodity, particularly at a national scale.
It is somewhat analogous to the concept of peak oil, where the finite resource is exhausted. Yet unlike oil, metals are unlikely to
run out when we run out of ore. The main issues with peak minerals and metals are the environmental impacts of processing
increasingly lower grade ores and the energy cost of recovering metals from secondary sources if dissipated in the economy.

Mineral Futures Discussion Paper October 2009
18
consumption of some metals do not necessarily decline with GDP growth and that, on this
basis, it is likely that stocks will become exhausted unless prices rise to reflect scarcity, or
substitute minerals can be found. Tilton and Lagos (2007) suggest the fixed stock paradigm
(that there is a given quantity of a resource available in the Earth) is a misleading indicator of
resource availability, and that an opportunity cost paradigm (that suggests a useable resource
quantity is better represented by price and the opportunity cost of using the resource) gives a
better picture of resource depletion and availability. They argue that while minerals such as
copper may become scarce and, thus more expensive, they may also become more available
(because technology has the capacity to move a resource from its base, to a reserve and into
the stock in use, consequently increasing the amount in use or as waste) with impetus for the
development of new technologies provided by high returns on investment. They conclude that
the resource base can be the only fixed stock, and there “…is no way to know the availability of
copper decades in advance” (Tilton and Lagos, 2007, p 23).
Gordon and co-authors (2006) contend that the relative proportions of minerals in the
lithosphere, in use, and in waste deposits, are a useful indicator of how scarce a particular
resource will be under such circumstances, and that a steady flow of mineral resources from
“virgin ores” to “waste” is difficult to justify in any case. The technology trend predicted by
these authors is one that tends towards high levels of recycling and reuse, and substitution of
appropriate alternatives where minerals are locked into use phases or whose useful qualities
are “dissipated” by their use in particular applications (Gordon et al., 2006).
An example of this trend in practice can be seen in Japan, where ‘product stewardship’ and
‘extended producer responsibility’ (EPR) initiatives are creating an increasingly large and
progressively inexpensive pool of resources for use in new product lines. Metals (including
copper, steel and aluminium) that may have originally come from a range of other continents
are effectively captured by Japan’s vertically integrated production, disassembly, recycling and
reuse system (Department of Trade and Industry (UK), 2005).
The position taken in this paper is that metals will not run out (unlike oil). Metals are
inherently recyclable and also accessible at a range of grades, however the energy,
environmental and social cost of doing so could constrain future usage. Metals are more
readily recoverable from end uses where the metal is used in a pure form and not dissipated.
2.2.6 Peak Oil and energy intensity of minerals production and transport
Continued oil depletion is likely to have a significant impact on mineral futures, where high
volumes of high-grade oil are a key foundation on which existing operations in the minerals
industry have been established. As with climate change, Peak Oil will have local as well as
global effects, with increased costs for equipment maintenance and fuelling, as well as
increased costs for the transportation of ores and metals to national and international
markets.
Less optimistic views of a post-Peak Oil society suggest a shift away from global trade in
commodities such as minerals to local markets as a response to reductions in transportability
(Heinberg, 2004; Heinberg, 2007; Moriarty and Honner, 2008; Nel and Cooper, 2009).
Decreases in both the quality and quantity of oil that is available for use in the minerals sector
have been identified by the CSIRO as a matter for concern (CSIRO, 2004). This concern is easily
understood when Australia’s comparatively small capacity for refining and storing oil-based
fuels is taken into account. It is also worth noting that Australian fuel imports have already
exceeded the monetary value of its coal exports.

Mineral Futures Discussion Paper October 2009
19
2.2.7 Social licence to operate and project financing
A social license refers to the ongoing tacit support received by a mining operation from the
local community and other stakeholders. Recent experiences have highlighted the critical
importance of transparency and mutual reciprocity in establishing the trust essential for a
social license to continue to operate (see for example Stehlik, 2005; Browne et al., 2009).
Obtaining a “social licence” to undertake particular mineral production processes, or extract
particular mineral commodities, has become more difficult as public attitudes to
environmental, health, social and economic aspects of mining, minerals, and sustainability
have changed over time.
The nature of mining operations and particular issues have been identified as having the
potential to significantly reduce the mineral industry’s social licence to operate include:
 extraction and use of fossil fuels, extraction and processing of uranium and other
carbon-intensive minerals such as aluminium
 use of water in mining and minerals processing
 use of oil for mining, minerals processing and transport
 scale and location of mining, and minerals use, and the impact on bio-capacity for
human consumption and waste
 community economic development and wealth capture in regional mining
communities, including local training and employment, post-mining legacies and
infrastructure (CSIRO, 2004)
 health issues with leaching, dust, air quality
 access and transportation
 consent from local communities (Indigenous and non-indigenous)
 competition over landscapes, the utilisation of landscape resources and how these are
defined (Franks, 2007).
Obtaining a social licence to operate can influence project financing, particularly where
financial industry benchmarks have been established for determining, assessing and managing
social and environmental risk in large development projects, including in the mining and
minerals sector. Mine project financing is an arena in which civil society organisations have
played significant roles in policy and decision-making contexts. For example, the Equator
Principles emerged from negotiations between NGOs (such as Friends of the Earth and the
Rainforest Action Center in the US) and financial institutions in response to social and
environmental concerns raised by communities affected by major development projects.
Signatories are committed to refusing loans to projects where the borrower is unable to
comply with social and environmental policies and procedures consistent with the Principles
(Equator Principles, 2009). Additionally, environmental campaigns, NGO research (e.g., the No
Dirty Gold campaign and the Dirty Metals: Mining, Communities and the Environment
report(Earthworks and Oxfam America, 2004)), and local communities in the vicinity of
operations are maintaining the pressure on industry to respond appropriately to social and
environmental issues.
Through constructive dialogue and advocacy the minerals industry has made many
commitments and concessions. Pressure is currently being places on the industry to accept UN
human rights and indigenous rights conventions; ILO labour law conventions; the right to free,
prior, informed consent; full disclosure and accessible reporting systems of environmental and
social effects of all phases of the mining process. As a result of such pressure, industry has
responded with the development of internal competencies (for example, regarding community

Mineral Futures Discussion Paper October 2009
20
relations) and the appointment of management personnel responsible for social and
environmental issues.
Of further critical importance is the relationship between the company and its local
community. In particular, community expectations must now be addressed and incorporated
in the decision-making processes throughout the project’s life. The expectation, especially in
Australia, is that major development and resource extraction projects involve community
decision-making and information sharing from the very beginning of the project, including
details of what arrangements have been put in place when the resources are depleted and the
mine is being closed down.
2.2.8.
Corporate sustainability reporting and corporate social responsibility
The development of corporate social responsibility (CSR) over the last twenty years has
encouraged increasingly comprehensive disclosure of the integrated environmental, social and
health impacts of mining, with growing standardisation of reporting guidelines. There has been
a growing demand for mandatory rather than voluntary reporting at both corporate level, and
site levels, and using sustainability indicators that can be verified by third parties (Jenkins and
Yakovlova, 2006; Sampat and Cardiff, 2009). Sustainability reports are tending to cover an
expanding range of issues within an integrated language of sustainable development, including
increased reporting of the economic impact and benefits of operations to local communities.
Minerals industry sustainability principles and reporting initiatives that are used to
demonstrate CSR include the Global Mining, Minerals and Sustainable development process
(MMSD, 2002). This document informed the 10 Sustainable Development Framework
principles adopted by the International Council on Metals and Mining (International Council on
Mining and Metals (ICMM), 2009). Concern about sustainability has also informed the Minerals
Council of Australia’s Enduring Value principles (Minerals Council of Australia, 2005), corporate
Sustainability Reports, as well as civil society policies such as the US-based Center for Science
in Public Participation’s Framework for Responsible Mining project (Miranda et al., 2005) and
the WWF-led Mine Certification project (Solomon et al., 2008).
The Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) is another sustainability reporting framework that has
been adopted by many mining operations that requires reporting on the impacts of operations
on project stakeholders and systems, environmental inputs, outputs and expenditure, labour
practices, human rights, and social risks to communities (GRI, 2006). The GRI has developed, in
collaboration with the ICMM, a mining and metals sector supplement that details specific
disclosures and indicators for the industry (GRI, 2009). The Extractives Industry Transparency
Initiative (EITI) is another such approach, which provides a standard for transparency in oil, gas
and mining that is implemented by both businesses and governments. EITI requires industry to
publish what they pay, and for governments to disclose the revenues they receive from
resource developments. Reporting may also be a requirement of certification schemes, such as
the Kimberly Process, an initiative designed to restrict the trade of conflict diamonds, or
participation in management systems, such the various standards of the ISO. A prominent
example of corporate social responsibility along the supply chain, driven by several large
companies, is the Green Lead
TM
initiative (http://greenlead.com/English_Index.html) for
cycling lead. Yet even with this initiative in place, significant issues for regional lead mining and
processing areas remain.

Mineral Futures Discussion Paper October 2009
21
2.2.9 Eco-efficiency and dematerialisation
Eco-efficiency in the production processes seeks to minimise environmental impacts at the
operational level (e.g. through energy efficiency, pollution prevention, minimising ecological
disturbance).
Eco-efficiency along the production cycle maximizes potential for recycling and reuse through
efficient material recovery and minimises contamination and dispersal of the material stock.
Critical questions for material eco-efficiency in metals are outlined in The Five Winds (2001)
study of the International Council of Metals and the Environment (ICME), and focus upon the
need to maximise the utility and value of the metal elements through multiple product life
cycles. This view notes the importance of considering the benefits and costs of particular uses
of materials to both the environment and to the economy (Five Winds International, 2001).
However, a sole focus on eco-efficiency may result in decreased resilience (Korhonen and
Seager, 2008).
Dematerialisation seeks opportunities to reduce inputs and impacts associated with providing
services in the economy. The concept of ‘servicing the supply chain’, which seeks to decouple
economic activity from material throughput (i.e. to make money from selling services rather
than products), has been demonstrated in other industries (Reiskin et al., 2000), but has only
seen limited examples of application with respect to minerals. A notable exception is the
leasing of copper (rather than selling) by Codelco in Chile. Such a strategy is a way for the
producing country to maintain control of the resource, rather than it going via discarded
products to countries with well developed extended producer responsibility and resource
recovery systems (e.g. Japan).
4
2.2.10 Industry structure: consolidation and emerging players
The major consolidation of the minerals industry over the last decade has become a powerful
driver affecting the relative power of fewer but larger major mining and minerals processing
corporations relative to other stakeholders.
Furthermore, companies from the ‘emerging economies’ such as China, Russia, Brazil, Chile,
South Africa and India, are an important feature of the global mining industry. Humphreys
(2009) identifies five key factors that have combined to boost the role of emerging economy
companies in mining over recent years: (i) market liberalisation and privatisation of state-
owned companies; (ii) privileged access of local companies to significant and underdeveloped
local resources; (iii) strong financial positions due to the mining boom of 2003-2008; (iv) drive
for geographic and commodity diversification often with support of respective home
governments; and (v) strategic expansion to ensure raw material supplies for their
metallurgical operations.
Debates over the costs and benefits of consolidation focus on how increased consolidation
improves technology development and capital raising through economies of scale. These
discussions also raise questions that consider how spreading monopolies could weaken the
influence of smaller industry players, buyers, labour unions, host governments and regulators,
and communities. These trends have also been accompanied by a decline in the involvement
of state-owned resource companies in the resources sectors (notwithstanding the resilience of
state ownership in the oil industry, and the persistence of major state owned minerals
companies such as Codelco, Chinalco and Chalco).
4
This issue has specific characteristics in relation to uranium. On one hand some international stewardship is already in place
tracking its use for civilian or military purposes, however reprocessed uranium does not return the metal to its original function
(due to time-dependent radioactive decay IAEA, 2007)) in the same way that that copper wire could be recycled to high purity
copper.

Mineral Futures Discussion Paper October 2009
22
Most of the largest minerals corporations hold interests in a diversity of mineral commodities
in different countries and continents. This increases their resilience to boom and bust in
commodity prices and to political changes. It also allows corporations to influence global policy
changes and shift norms in competitor countries by playing one country off against another
5
,
creating a ‘race to the bottom’ around issues such as market liberalisation, or the imposition of
a carbon pricing system. Alternatively, global standards applied across the dominant global
corporations in the industry can have the effect of raising industry-wide best practice and
exposing bad actors.
2.2.11 Law and governance
Increasing concern for environmental and social sustainability has led to the formation of
global, national and regional networks of communities and Non-Government Organisations
focussed on mining and mineral issues. Concern has primarily been raised with respect to
rigorous governance of the industry and the ecosystems and communities in which it operates.
For example, the global civil society network, Mines and Communities, has affiliates from all
continents and maintains as strong critique of industry claims to corporate social responsibility
and sustainability and the potential of the minerals industry to contribute to social and
economic development in host communities, particularly in emerging economies (Horowitz,
2006; Whitmore, 2006; Hilson, 2006).
These issues were examined during the World Bank’s Extractive Industries Review. It has since
influenced industry practices and operating environments, as have global environmental and
development governance regimes, such as the Rio Declaration, the Global Reporting Initiative,
the Global Compact, OECD Guidelines on Multinational Enterprises, World Bank Operational
Guidelines, OECD Convention on Combating Bribery, ILO Conventions 98, 169, 176, and the
Voluntary Principles on Security and Human Rights (International Council on Mining and
Metals (ICMM), 2009).
The legal, policy and environmental management regulatory and governance environment in
which the mining and minerals sector operates has been, and is likely to continue to be,
subject to intense contestation and negotiation in the future. Financial and fiscal issues, public
participation, polluter pays, extended producer responsibility, and higher standards of
environmental and social impact management and reporting will all influence future
trajectories for the sector (Bastida et al., 2005; MacDonald, 2006).
2.3. INDUSTRY RESPONSE TO DRIVERS
The document thus far has outlined a broad, but not exhaustive list, of drivers that may affect
the long-term future of the Australian minerals industry. The response to these drivers is now
discussed from several perspectives. This section draws on work by the International Council
of Minerals and Metals (International industry body); Australasian Institute of Mining and
Metallurgy (Professional body); Minerals Council of Australia (Peak Industry body); Australian
Government (initiatives to support industry) and the Centre for Sustainable Resource
Processing (Technical research perspective).
The International Council on Mining and Metals is coordinating the follow up implementation
of the Mining, Minerals and Sustainable Development project. A report on product
stewardship (ICMM, 2006) renews the call for a systems approach to materials stewardship
5
Although this is limited to some extent by the mineral industry’s sunken capital and the geographic anchoring of resource
processing to particular localities, which reduces mobility compared to manufacturers.

Mineral Futures Discussion Paper October 2009
23
across the life cycle, and links its pursuit with a need for ensuring the social licence to operate
is maintained, market access and development, regulation and cost savings.
At the national level, the Minerals Council of Australia (MCA) has primarily focussed on issues
of future health, safety and environmental issues at the mine site in its Enduring Value
initiative. Fostering stewardship along the production chain is more difficult given the number
of actors involved. A recent response by the MCA to the proposed Australian Government’s
Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme is critical of the proposal to auction permits (before the
rest of the world adopts this practice), because of job losses which are likely to eventuate.
The Australian Government Department of Resources, Energy and Tourism coordinates the
Leading Practice Sustainable Development Program for the Mining Industry which offers
handbooks on a range of topics including water and tailings management, mine closure and
rehabilitation. These volumes have been well utilised by industry, and a handbook on
stewardship has been added to the series.
A large survey of over 9000 members was conducted by the AusIMM and CSIRO to determine
how members prioritised issues and drivers (Moffat et al., 2009). Responses were obtained
from 957 members and drivers were ranked from not at all important (1) to very important (7).
The results for the drivers thought to be most important over the next 20-30 years are shown
in Table 1. Notably, environment was rated the least important issue or driver.
Table 1: Future industry drivers ranked by AusIMM members (Moffat et al., 2009)
Drivers
Mean Std Dev
Economics of mining: cost and return on investment for Australian operations
compared to elsewhere (e.g.., declining ore grades, availability and accessibility of
new ore bodies)
6.17 0.94
Global context
: economic stability, rates of growth, and consumption patterns in
consumer economies (e.g., USA, China)
6.08 1.02
Australian society
: expectations around
how the industry operates (e.g.,
rehabilitation of mining operations) and treats its employees (e.g., safety
standards)
5.47 1.25
Substitution
: availability of substitutes for mineral commodities in upstream
production processes and end user preferences (e.g., alternatives to coal for
electricity, alternatives to aluminium for packaging)
5.21 1.39
Emissions trading
: national and international frameworks that have the effect of
imposing a price on carbon and/or greenhouse gasses
4.98 1.62
Environment
:
effects of increased climate variability and unforseen extreme
weather events (e.g., drought, cyclones)
4.73 1.66
The Centre for Sustainable Resource Processing has identified challenges facing the minerals
industry as a result of climate change, greenhouse gas emissions and areas for technical
innovation to respond to these challenges (Lund et al., 2008). It identified iron/steel and
aluminium as the sectors with the greatest potential for emission reduction. This research
highlights the part decreasied ore grades will play in increasing the CO
2
emissions of associated
with the Australian minerals industry.
Given the complex nature of the drivers and industry response, the next section proposes a
framework around which to structure an integrated conceptualisation of the minerals industry
within the economy.

Mineral Futures Discussion Paper October 2009
24
2.4. THE MINERAL RESOURCES LANDSCAPE: AN
INTEGRATING FRAMEWORK
Research on minerals sustainability has generally focused on concepts of pollution prevention,
cleaner production and eco-efficiency (Hilson, 2000b; Hilson, 2003; van Berkel, 2007a)
(discussed further in Section 3.4). The need to extend such sustainability research to also
understand a broad range of connected issues (including sustainable consumption, recycling,
end of life management, society etc) is well established (Ehrenfeld, 2008; Jackson, 2005; Ryan,
2005; Tukker et al., 2006). For example, the Minerals Mining and Sustainable Development
Project (MMSD, 2002) clearly identifies the need to link minerals production and consumption
in an integrated and trans-disciplinary framework as a key challenge facing the global minerals
sector.
Cooper and Giurco (2009) propose the Mineral Resources Landscape, illustrated in
Figure 3, as a framework for guiding integrated approaches to the contested and complex
questions concerning mineral futures and sustainability. The Mineral Resources Landscape
offers an expanded conceptualisation of minerals sustainability to link minerals production and
consumption in an integrated assessment across the entire minerals supply chain. This
framework guides an integrated approach to mineral futures by explicating the underlying and
often unarticulated assumptions that affect the application of different conceptual,
geographical, organisational, temporal; and life cycle scales by which mineral sustainability is
defined (Cooper and Giurco, 2009).
The key leverage points identified in
Figure 3 represent the flow of minerals through the supply chain, from a primary or secondary
source, through to processing and production, to offering a ‘service’ or ‘value’ to society, with
the rate of use being driven by consumption trends. As indicated in
Figure 3, society, technology, the economy, ecology, and governance structures interact to
shape the dynamics of the Mineral Resources Landscape, across local, national and global
scales. When considered for a single commodity, the implications for connected commodity
cycles should also be considered.
Figure 3: The Mineral Resources Landscape (Cooper and Giurco, 2009)

Mineral Futures Discussion Paper October 2009
25
The mineral resources landscape is structured around the following nodes (explained with
examples for copper).
 what’s our starting material (and with what other metal cycles is it linked)?
o land based copper ores may be connected with the production of lead, zinc,
gold and other metals
o secondary copper being recovered from printed circuit boards
o copper from deep sea nodules
 how do we process it to metal (extraction and production technologies)?
o over 15,000,000 t/a of copper is mined globally (USGS, 2008)
o via hydrometallurgical and pyrometallurgical processes
o almost 2,000,000 t/a is from secondary sources globally
 how do we use and value the metal to provide services in the economy (level of
service and value)?
o used to convey hot water in copper pipes
o used to conduct electricity in copper wires etc.
 at what rate does the system cycle and what is driving this (consumption patterns)?
o demand is increasing driven by growth from China
The key leverage points governing the Mineral Resources Landscape are further described in
Table 2.
Table 2: Description of key variables governing the Mineral Resources Landscape
(Cooper and Giurco, 2009)
Key Variable
Description
 Material source
(raw material)
The primary or secondary material source, including terrestrial ore bodies,
tailings that could be reprocessed, deep sea ore bodies, scrap for recycling,
and re-use, including issues relating to the tolerability of trade-offs between
natural and social capital, as well as the complexity and implications
associated with linked metal cycles at the elemental level (Verhoef et al.,
2004)
 Extraction and
production
technologies
(transformation
technologies)
Considerations influencing current and new technologies, including issues
relating to the eco-efficiency of minerals production.
 Level of service
and value
(ultimate use and
potential for
reuse)
The ‘services’ and ‘value’ that minerals products offer to society are related to
their end use, for example gold may be used to make jewellery, nano-scale
electronics or be stored in bank vaults. Such aspects are highly subjective,
depending on individual and societal interests, wants and needs.
 Consumption
patterns (rate of
use)
Issues relating to the growing ‘urban metabolism’, demand, human aspects of
behaviour, use, culture, needs, wants, wellbeing, as well as the distribution of
resources between industrial and developing countries. Following use, the
waste products have significant potential for reuse.
The landscape is intended to provide a framework to map drivers, stakeholders, current and
missing domains of research activities and the leverage points for change. The foresight
process to which this framework may be attached is yet to be defined and will constitute an
initial activity of the Cluster to which this discussion paper is an important foundation.

Mineral Futures Discussion Paper October 2009
26
Examples of some prominent approaches to reconciling uncertain drivers and using
foresighting processes are explored in Section 2.5 (and also in the companion papers of
Johnston (2009b; 2009a) and Riedy and Daly (2009)).
2.5. FUTURES STUDIES: WHAT ROLE FOR RESOURCES?
Given the diversity of drivers affecting both the industry and wider economy, this section
explores prominent projects which have adopted a broad or long-view of human society and
economy, namely:
 Limits to Growth
 The Great Transitions.
In considering these projects, we are seeking insight into two areas. Firstly, what approaches
are possible to consider long-term futures whilst reconciling inherent uncertainty, and what
are their merits and limitations? These insights, together with information in the scenarios
discussion papers reviewing generalised foresight approaches and specific examples about
potential foresight methods, will be applied in the cluster research. Secondly, this review
illustrates the role of resources in future economies as seen from a whole-of-society
perspective. In other words: how does research considering the future of society view mineral
resources? rather than how does the minerals industry see itself positioned in a future
society?. The second point is explored in Section 3.4
2.5.1. Limits to Growth
The first edition of the revolutionary, and highly controversial, Limits to Growth report (LTG1)
was published in 1972 (Meadows et al., 1972). LTG1 and captured the results of a two year
project commissioned by the Club of Rome. The work applied system dynamics theory and
computer modelling to analyse the long-term consequences of growth in the global population
and material economy. LTG1 presents 12 scenarios from the World3 computer model,
demonstrating different possible trajectories of development from 1900 to 2100, with
emphasis on the interactions between population growth, resource use and planetary limits to
growth.
The second edition of Limits to Growth (LTG2) (Meadows et al., 1974) presented slightly
updated versions of the scenarios presented in LTG1, following the alteration of a few
numerical parameters in the World3 model. Even so, the general conclusions remain the same,
contending there is an imperative to globally incite “profound, proactive, societal innovation
through technological, cultural and institutional change in order to avoid an increase in the
ecological footprint of humanity beyond the carrying capacity of planet earth” (Meadows et
al., 2004, p X).
Upon revision of the global developments that transpired between 1970 and 1990, Meadows
et al. (1992) published Beyond the Limits (BTL), 20 years after publication of LTG1 (Meadows et
al., 1972). BTL presented 14 scenarios and demonstrated consistencies between the possible
futures drawn from the scenarios of LTG1 and LTG2 (Meadows et al., 1972; Meadows et al.,
1974) and the 2 decades of global development between 1970 and 1990. Most notably, BTL
showed the population and economy to have grown beyond the support capacities of the
Earth and define this observation as ‘overshoot’. In the scenarios presented in BTL, Meadows
and colleagues (1992) demonstrated how the implementation of wise global policy, changes in
technology and institutions, political goals and personal aspirations could shift the trajectory of
global development back into sustainable territory.

Mineral Futures Discussion Paper October 2009
27
In the decade of global development following publication of BTL, much data and evidence has
arisen in support of the authors’ contention that the world has overshot its human carrying
capacity (Figure 4).
In order to capture the global developments from 1992 to 2004, and to better articulate the
findings and intentions of LTG (Meadows et al., 1972; Meadows et al., 1974) and BTL
(Meadows et al., 1992) for a modern audience, Meadows, Randers and Meadows published
Limits to Growth: the 30 year update (LTG30, Meadows et al., 2004). LTG30 presents 10
alternative scenarios offering alternative visions of how population growth, resource
consumption and global physical limits may interact over the coming century.
In accordance with the scenario trends presented in LTG1 (Meadows et al., 1972) thirty years
prior, the scenarios presented in LTG30 (Meadows et al., 2004) indicate the first decade of the
21
st
century to be a period of growth, and thus don’t conflict with the predictions of critics to
the LTG theory. Meadows et al. (2004, p XXI) assert that “we must all wait another decade for
conclusive evidence about who has the better understanding”. Meadows et al. plan to update
the LTG30 report in 2012 and expect that by then “there will be abundant data to test the
reality of overshoot” (Meadows et al., 2004, p XXII).
In the interim, through comparison of global historical data covering 1970-2000 with three
World3 scenarios (‘standard run’, ‘comprehensive technology’ and ‘stabilised world’) from
LTG1 (Meadows et al., 1972), Turner (2008, p 410) “lends support to the conclusion from the
LTG that the global system is on an unsustainable trajectory unless there is substantial and
rapid reduction in consumptive behaviour, in combination with technological progress”.
Turner (2008) shows that the ‘standard run’ scenario aligns with the ‘conventional worlds’
scenarios of the Great Transition essay (Raskin et al., 2002), in which the future is shaped by
the physical, economic and social relationships currently governing global development. This
scenario demonstrates exponential growth in food, industrial output, and population growth
until resource limitations force a slowdown in industrial growth, after which collapse is shown
to ensue in the middle of this century (Meadows et al., 1974).
Figure 4: Ecological Footprint versus Earth’s carrying capacity, from (Meadows et al., 2004),
illustrating ‘overshoot’ from the late 1970’s.

Mineral Futures Discussion Paper October 2009
28
A number of key insights presented in LTG30 (Meadows et al., 2004), offer highly relevant
contributions to the discussion on mineral futures. These are summarised in the following
points:
 Limits to growth do not represent direct limits to the number of people, cars, houses
or factories, but rather limits to the rate at which humanity can extract resources and
emit wastes without exceeding the productive or adsorptive capacities of the world,
specifically that:
“growth in the harvest of renewable resources, depletion of non-renewable materials,
and filling of the sinks are combining slowly and inexorably to raise the amount of
energy and capital required to sustain the quantity and quality of material flows
required by the economy” (Meadows et al., 2004, p 51).
 The concept of ‘physical limits to growth’ is key in the discussion on minerals futures,
defined as “limits to the ability of planetary sources to provide materials and energy
and to the ability of planetary sinks to absorb the pollutions and waste” (Meadows et
al., 2004, p 9).
 Some sources and sinks are exhausted to the extent that they are limiting growth by
increasing costs or environmental degradation. “The throughput flows presently
generated by the human economy cannot be maintained at their current rates for very
much longer” (Meadows et al., 2004, p 9). This trend is clearly evidenced by minerals
resources, whose extraction results in increased tailings volumes, greenhouse gas
emissions, water consumption, energy consumption and waste rock as ore grades
decline (Meadows et al., 2004; Mudd, 2007). “Metal ore depletion hastens the rate of
fossil fuel depletion and places greater burdens on the planet’s sinks” (Meadows et al.,
2004, p 106).
 Possible avenues for reducing the global ecological footprint include lowering the
population, altering consumption norms and implementing more resource efficient
technologies.
“current high rates of throughput are not necessary to support a decent standard of
living for all the world’s people” (Meadows et al., 2004, p 9).
 The scenarios show that technological progress and market transformation need to be
supplemented with wisdom in order for a sustainable human society to be realised.
Wisdom can be applied through changes in material consumption and family size, and:
“it could focus on mindfully increasing the quality of life rather than on mindlessly
expanding material consumption and the physical capital stack.” (Meadows et al.,
2004, p 12)
“the only real choices are to bring the throughputs that support human activities down
to sustainable levels through human choice, human technology, and human
organisation, or to let nature force the decision through lack of food, energy or
materials, or through an increasingly unhealthy environment.” (Meadows et al., 2004,
p 13)
The urgency for action is stressed because the consequences of ‘overshoot’ are
predicted to emerge in the next two decades.
 Recycling, greater efficiency, increased product lifetime, and source reduction have
not yet reduced the vast materials flows through the economy. Surprisingly, they have
at best slowed its rate of growth.

Mineral Futures Discussion Paper October 2009
29
Meadows, Randers & Meadows (2004, p 106) also point to the work of the MMSD (2002) to
indicate the potential limits that environmental and social factors may place on mineral
extraction, as outlined below:
 availability of energy, impacts associated with energy inputs, increasing energy
intensity with declining ore grades;
 availability of water, environmental impacts associated with water use, increasing
water intensity with declining ore grades;
 land use conflicts surrounding issues of biodiversity, conservation, cultural
significance, agriculture, food security;
 social licence to operate;
 changing patterns of use;
 ecosystem limits on the build up of mineral products or by-products (especially metals)
in the air, water, topsoil or vegetation.
2.5.2. Great Transition
The Great Transition essay proceeds from the contention that “humanity has the power to
foresee, to choose and to act”, to transition to “a future of enriched lives, human solidarity
and a healthy planet”, (Raskin et al., 2002, p IX). The essay draws together the research efforts
of the Global Scenario Group. The Group was developed through an initiative of the Stockholm
Environment Institute and the Tellus Institute in 1995 as an international, independent body
for engaging in the process of scenario development to decipher what is needed to transition
towards sustainability.
The Great Transition essay (Raskin et al., 2002) is described as a composition of analyses,
imagination and engagement, in the following elements.
Analysis of past and current transitions
The Great Transition essay (Raskin et al., 2002) presents an analysis of historical transitions,
with a focus on three key periods of fundamental transformation: from Stone Age culture to
Early Civilisation, approximately 10000 years ago; from early civilisation to the modern era
over the last 1000 years; and what is proposed to be the third major historical transition in
progress, referred to as the ‘planetary phase’. Raskin et al. (2002) show the global system to
be in the early phase of the ‘planetary transition’.
Raskin et al. (2002) show these transitions demonstrate a pattern of development through
sequences of quasi-stability, rapid chaotic change, and re-stabilisation. The analysis goes
further to describe how various aspects of past socio-economic transitions have evolved
through history. These trends are extended to describe the emerging properties of the
prevailing ‘planetary phase’. Trends of increasing social complexity, technological complexity,
spatial connectedness and paces of change, from one epoch to the next, are said to be
affecting the emergence of global governance, globalisation of the world economy, and an
information and communication revolution.
According to Raskin et al. (2002), “The ultimate shape of things to come depends to a great
extent on human choices yet to be made and actions yet to be taken… A transition toward a
planetary phase of civilisation has been launched, but not yet completed”. This sets the
imperative for vision and action through the development of, and engagement with, a diverse
array of possible paths of future global development.
“The rapidity of the planetary transition increases the urgency for vision and action lest
we cross thresholds that irreversibly reduce options – a climate discontinuity, locking-in
to unsustainable technological choices, and the loss of cultural and biological diversity”
(Raskin et al., 2002, p 11).

Mineral Futures Discussion Paper October 2009
30
Imagination – the scenarios
Imagination is offered through narrative accounts of six alternative long-ranging global future
scenarios, with consideration of their implications. Three classes of scenario are considered,
referred to as ‘conventional worlds’, ‘barbarization’ and ‘Great Transitions’. Each scenario class
represents a fundamentally different long-term outlook on the prospects for global
development.
‘Conventional worlds’ assumes that the future is shaped by the dominant forces and values
currently driving globalisation, and is founded on the premise of essential continuity. The
‘Barbarization’ futures are marked by fundamental but undesirable social change, while the
‘Great Transition’ futures envision fundamental and favourable social transformation, whereby
“new values and development paradigms ascend that emphasise the quality of life and
material sufficiency, human solidarity and global equity, and affinity with nature and
environmental sustainability” (Raskin et al., 2002, p 15). For each of these three scenario
classes, two scenarios are presented, making a total of six scenarios. Table 3 summarises the
worldviews and philosophies underpinning the six scenarios, as well as an interpretation of the
implications of what the development trends within each scenario might mean for commodity
markets and subsequently for the future production and consumption of mineral resources.
Engagement with the Great Transition
Raskin et al. (2002) contend that a transition from current globalising trends to patterns of bio-
regionalism and localism conveyed in ‘eco-communalism’ is an unlikely vision and therefore
identify the ‘new sustainability paradigm’ as the Great Transition. The Great Transition is
promoted as the preferred path and is further advanced by identifying the key values,
strategies and agents for progressing the ‘new global agenda’. Additionally, the Great
Transition Initiative has further developed the Great Transition vision in a paper series
addressing critical issues.
In comparing the key agents for change driving the ‘conventional worlds’ and Great Transition
scenarios, Raskin and colleagues (2002) make a crucial contribution to the discussion
surrounding questions of agency and the demarcation of key drivers that need to be addressed
to ensure future sustainable systems of mineral production and consumption. The Great
Transition scenario decouples the conventional link between wellbeing and consumption in a
values led transformation of popular lifestyle and political priorities.
Table 3:Contrasting agents for change set forth in the Great Transition essay (Raskin et al.,
2002), with implications for mineral futures

Mineral Futures Discussion Paper October 2009
31
Table 4:Contrasting agents for change set forth in the Great Transition essay (Raskin et al., 2002), with implications for mineral futures
Scenario
Philosophy
and values
Indicators of Change
Drivers of Change
Implications for minerals resources
Conventional Worlds
Market
Forces
Market
optimism,
hidden &
enlightened
hand
Conventional link between
consumption and wellbeing
maintained
Proximate drivers
–
population, economy,
technology, governance
 Commodity markets grow according to business-as-usual
predictions, with market forces determining supply and demand.
 Increasing consumption generates further throughput of natural
resources and associated environmental impacts.
 Environmental scarcity would increase prices and market demand
for businesses supporting technological innovation, resource
efficiency and resource substitution.
Policy
Reform
Policy
stewardship
Conventional link between
consumption and wellbeing
maintained,
Increased resource
efficiency decouples
consumption from
throughput.
Proximate drivers
–
population, economy,
technology, governance
 Commodity markets may grow or shrink (at least for some
commodities such as fossil fuels), as regulation and ‘environmental
market’ creation imposes full cost accounting and internalisation of
environmental and social costs.
 Wise policy on resource efficiency, renewable resources and
environmental protection mitigate social and environmental impact.
 Interventionist public policies (such as industry development,
protectionism) may drive a shift towards dematerialisation,
preferred technologies, and strengthened local and regional markets
over global markets
Barbarisation
Breakdown
Existential
gloom,
population/
resource
catastrophe
Conventional link between
consumption and wellbeing
collapses for all people.
Survivalist regime for all
people.
Proximate drivers
–
insecurity, survivalist
values to meet basic
needs.
 Trade in commodities breaks down and local and global markets
collapse

Mineral Futures Discussion Paper October 2009
32
Scenario
Philosophy
and values
Indicators of Change
Drivers of Change
Implications for minerals resources
Barbarisation
Fortress
World
Social chaos,
nasty nature
of man
Conventional link between
consumption and wellbeing
maintained for some
people. Survivalist regime
for others.
Proximate drivers
–
insecurity, conflict,
survivalist values.
Maintaining power and
contesting power
structures,
 Commodity production and exchange systems break down as
capacity to produce and trade declines in a permanent siege and
conflict environment reduces reliable access to resources
Great Transitions
Eco
-
communalism
Pastoral
romance,
human
goodness, evil
of
industrialism
Conventional link
between
consumption and wellbeing
decoupled.
Consumption decoupled
from throughput through
dematerialisation.
Ultimate drivers
–
values,
needs, knowledge,
understanding, power
structures, culture
 Commodity production reduces as scale of production is geared to
local rather than global demand,
 Global markets give way to multiple local markets.
 Shift towards low-tech/ ‘appropriate’ technology reduces demand
for minerals, especially high tech minerals (e.g. aluminium)
New
Sustainability
Paradigm
Sustainability
as a
progressive
global social
evolution
Conventional link between
consumption and wellbeing
decoupled.
Consumption decoupled
from throughput through
dematerialisation.
Ultimate drivers
–
values,
needs, knowledge,
understanding, power
structures, culture
 Commodity production and resource consumption reduces to fit
local and global bio-capacity (guided by adoption of sustainability
principles and shift to an industrial ecology):
‘Resource requirements decrease as consumerism abates,
populations stabilise, growth slows in affluent areas, and settlement
patterns become more integrated and compact’ (Raskin et al., 2002,
p 92)
 Includes rapid diffusion of environmentally benign technology along
with a shift to less materially-intensive lifestyles.
 A transition shaped by new values
 Energy transition prompts an age of renewable technology
 Materials transition instigates a reduction in resource throughput
and phasing out of toxic materials
 Agricultural transition instigates increased reliance on ecological
farming

Mineral Futures Discussion Paper October 2009
33
2.6. SUMMARY: GLOBAL DRIVERS AND FUTURES
This section outlined a range of
drivers
affecting the future of minerals and metals including:

the degree to which societal aspirations and sustainability values change production and
consumption practices

dematerialisation and decoupling of well-being from material consumption

climate change: both as a driver of a carbon constrained economy and with implications for
minerals processing operations from extreme weather and changes to water availability

ore availability, peak minerals and increasing environmental impacts from processing lower
grade ores and potential of increased deep sea mining

complexity of metals recycling

peak oil and transport and energy availability and cost

social licence to operate, corporate social responsibility and link to availability of project
financing

consolidating industry structure

governance models; including degree of community participation.
Response to drivers
(in particular sustainability) was reviewed from several perspectives:

Global: International Council of Minerals and Metals
o
follows on from MMSD project; calls for systems approach to materials stewardship
and links its pursuit with maintaining social licence to operate

Industry: Minerals Council of Australia
o
Enduring value
focuses on health, safety and environmental issues primarily at the
mine site. Recent reports also foreshadow job losses resulting from CPRS.

Government: Department of Resources, Energy and Tourism
o
Leading Practice Sustainable Development Handbooks
have been recently updated and
now include a focus on stewardship

Professionals: Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy
o
recent survey of 9000 members by CSIRO (Moffat
et al
, 2009) shows economics a more
prominent driver than environment amongst members

Research and Technology: Centre for Sustainable Resource Processing
o
identifies new technology in iron/steel and also aluminium as sectors for greatest
emission reduction potential.
There is a need to better understand the linkages between drivers and actors when considering future
scenarios and the
Mineral Resources Landscape
is proposed as an integrating framework. This approach:

considers production consumption cycle and considers the service and value which metal
provides in the economy

articulates social, technological, economic, ecological, governance domains

prompts consideration of multiple scale interactions (local, national, global).
The potential foresight approaches that could be used in the Cluster research are explored in
companion documents. The two prominent future projects reviewed here (Limits to Growth;
The Great Transitions) show the central role of considering resource requirement of futures
and that we have already overshot Earth’s carrying capacity (Limits to Growth). Exploring the
six future scenarios outlined in The Great Transitions, their underlying values and implications
for mineral resources will be useful for imagining radical change.
In the following sections, this background is linked to what is currently understand about
commodity futures, technology futures and regions in transition to identify gaps and
challenges.

Mineral Futures Discussion Paper October 2009
34
3. COMMODITY FUTURES
COMMODITY
FUTURES OUTLINE
This section explores the way future commodity use is studied and understood. It will:
 explore the commodity cycle from the perspective of anticipated futures for primary
and secondary production and consumption based on current trends (3.1);
 discuss downstream demand forecasts that might reflect changes in end uses and the
implications of closed-loop minerals cycles (3.2);
 consider production and demand through a Material Flow Analysis and explores
models used for understanding commodity flows along the combined production and
consumption cycle (3.3);
 identify systemic environmental sustainability issues of production and consumption
through all phases of the minerals system (3.4);
 concludes by identifying some challenging issues regarding minerals in a sustainable
future Australian economy and other commodity future issues that require further
discussion and investigation (3.5).
3.1. PRODUCTION TRENDS & FORECASTS
This section gives an overview of the information available in production forecasts, their
source and approach, intended use, implied assumptions and the time horizon considered. The
focus in not on particular commodities, but rather, on the role that information on production
forecasts fills in understanding mineral futures. Production forecasts are split into primary
resources and production (i.e. production from primary resources being land based ores, re-
mined tailings dumps and ocean resources) and secondary resources and production (i.e.
production from recycled scrap).
3.1.1. Primary resources and production
Forecasts relating to primary resources are split into forecasts of resource reserves and
forecasts of production and prices.
Resources
Estimates of future reserves available are periodically updated, rather than forecast. These are
available from the Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics (ABARE, 2008),
and the US Geological Survey (www.usgs.gov). Geoscience Australia (2008; 2009a) also
publishes important information concerning Australia’s future capacity to produce mineral
resources, including reference to the prospects of Australia’s newest minerals frontier –
offshore mineral resources. The Australian Offshore Minerals Locations Map (CSIRO and
Geoscience Australia, 2006), recently developed and published through a collaborative project
between Geoscience Australia, CSIRO’s Wealth from Oceans Flagship and Division of
Exploration and Mining and each of the state and Northern Territory Geological Surveys,
identifies mineral deposits and occurrences within Australia’s exclusive economic zone. This is
an area significantly larger than Australia’s land area and was recently expanded by the UN
commission (Geoscience Australia, 2009b). As at April 2008, two mineral exploration licences
(MELs) were active and 78 MEL applications had been submitted for exploration in offshore
areas (Geoscience Australia, 2008).

Mineral Futures Discussion Paper October 2009
35
Production
Historical production information for all Australia’s main commodities is collated on a
quarterly basis in the Australian Mineral Statistics (ABARE) reports. Medium term future
forecasts by volume and value are given in Australian Commodities as shown in Table 5,
together with growth projections.
Table 5: Australian energy and mineral exports (ABARE, 2009)
Additional detail for each commodity including primary and scrap resources is available. Table
6 provides and outlook for gold. Qualitative developments affecting technologies and markets
are also provided.
Table 6: Gold outlook (ABARE, 2009)

Mineral Futures Discussion Paper October 2009
36
Similar information is available from the United States Geological Survey Minerals Yearbook
and Mineral Commodity Summaries (http://minerals.usgs.gov/minerals/), which details
information for the US by commodity, and world-wide by country.
Global Commodity Demand Scenarios, a report prepared for the Minerals Council of Australia
by Access Economics (2008a), presents potential global mineral commodity demand scenarios
between now and 2020. These forecasts are established upon ‘business-as-usual’ economic
growth, which in turn is used to estimate global mineral demand, based upon historical
commodity demand at various levels of income in 2006 (Access Economics, 2008a). The link
between global economic growth and commodity demand is enriched by assumed “trend
improvements in minerals intensity per unit of gross domestic product over time” and the
potential economic impacts of carbon taxes (Access Economics, 2008a, p 12). Assumptions of
‘trend improvements’ stipulate that for most minerals, increasing demand will be met by
growth in supply, with any supply constraints being resolved through hastened substitution. In
addition to baseline ‘business-as-usual’ projections of global commodity demand, possible
‘upside’ and ‘downside’ demand scenarios are presented to estimate commodity demand in
alternative futures operating on elevated and limited growth rates in productivity, modelled by
one half a standard deviation above and below the baseline case respectively.
The projections, presented in Global Commodity Demand Scenarios (Access Economics,
2008a), point to the significant scale at which the minerals sector must increase production in
order to meet projected commodity demand in 2020 (Figure 5). This potential ‘global
commodity boom’ is driven primarily by strong industrial production growth in China and
India, which is speculated to increase demands for base metals including aluminium, copper,
nickel, zinc, lead and steel (Figure 5). By 2020, global coal, iron ore, and aluminium production
needs to increase by 45%, 54% and 58% above its 2006 scale respectively. Access Economics
(2008a, p 10) poses the question: “will the supply expansion now underway in Australia and
around the world be rapid enough and large enough to meet the projected growth in world
demand for commodities in the next few decades?”.
Figure 5: Production increase required by 2020 to meet demand (Access Economics, 2008a)

Mineral Futures Discussion Paper October 2009
37
Infrastructure 2020 – Can the domestic supply chain match global demand? – a report for the
Mineral Council of Australia prepared by Access Economics (2008c), examines the supply side
implications for Australia’s mineral industry following the commodity demand projections
presented in Global Commodity Demand Scenarios (Access Economics, 2008a). Three scenarios
of Australian mineral supply, termed ‘decline’, ‘holding the line’ and ‘advance’ are projected
based on assumptions for market share of the global demand for minerals between now and
2020. These scenarios build upon the ABARE production forecasts for Australian mineral
production through to 2013. For coal, iron ore, aluminium, copper, gold, nickel, lead and zinc,
Access Economics (2008c) presents supply projections under the ‘holding the line’ scenario in
the form of one chart showing the level of Australian output and another showing Australia’s
share of the global market, as shown in Figure 3(a) and (b) for iron ore.
Figure 6: Australian iron ore production (a) and global market share (b) forecast under
‘holding the line’ scenario (Access Economics, 2008c, p 17)
The ‘decline’ scenario sees Australia relinquishing market share, by reverting back to the
market share trend experienced in 2002, in the period from 2014 to 2020. Access Economics
(2008b) comments on the undesirability of this scenario in terms of sustainable throughput
and Australia’s prosperity. Access Economics (2008c) refers to current mineral throughputs as
being sustainable – a clear contradiction to Meadows and colleagues’ (2004) interpretation of
sustainable throughputs:
Such a scenario would be one of a failure to capitalise on Australia’s strong
comparative advantage in resources, held back by one or more of the many minefields
that stand between the most prosperous possible position in 2020 and today’s
sustainable throughput of industrial commodities through Australian supply chains.
After all, it only takes breaks in the chain – in the availability of skilled workers, or the
adequacy of the State and Federal regulatory framework (such as for approvals), or the
speed of native title negotiations, or the fumbling caused by the splintering of
ownership along supply chains – to result in a lack of rail or mine or road capacity
which then makes the difference between better and worse outcomes for Australia and
the incomes of Australians (Access Economics, 2008b, p 26 )
The ‘advance’ scenario operates on the assumption that the mineral production forecast by
ABARE between 2007 and 2013 is maintained between 2014 and 2020. For coal, iron ore,
aluminium, copper, gold, nickel, lead and zinc, Access Economics (2008c) presents charts
showing projections of production under the three different scenarios, as illustrated in Figure 7
for iron ore. The model assumes global production to equal global consumption and for the
change in market share to be the same across all minerals.

Mineral Futures Discussion Paper October 2009
38
Figure 7: Australian iron ore production under 3 scenarios (Access Economics, 2008c, p 27)
Access Economics (2008c) estimates that Australia would be down $91 billion in national
income in 2020 under the ‘decline’ scenario, compared to ‘holding the line scenario’. In
contrast, Australia is estimated to have almost $120 billion more in national income in 2020
under the ‘advance’ scenario, when compared to the ‘hold the line scenario’. Access
Economics asserts that:
Future prosperity requires policies to start adjusting now to help ensure that the supply
chains and regulatory frameworks will be in place for Australia to pursue its comparative
advantage in minerals production…Australia’s comparative advantage on resources
suggests that this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to surf an incredible wave of global
development Access Economics, (2008c, pp V-VII).
These forecasts assume that it is inherently preferable (notwithstanding sustainability
considerations) for Australia to maintain or advance its market share. Due consideration is not
given to how minerals production investment could match with to a holistic assessment of
longer-term national benefit related to infrastructure investment and development goals,
resource conservation, societal priorities, and biological capacity.
A paper by Mudd and Ward (2008) Will Sustainability Constraints Cause ‘Peak Minerals’? tests
the use of the Hubbert curve ‘peak’ modelling to project mineral production in Australia, USA
and Canada to 2100 and beyond. Mudd and Ward show that if the trends such as ore grade
decline continue, then:
Ultimately, the world may not physically ‘run out’ of copper, coal, gold or other
minerals, but aggregate production must peak and decline as new mining operations
become increasingly constrained by lower mineral deposits, greenhouse emissions,
energy costs and water (2008, p 9).
This has negative implications for the environmental impacts of continued mining discussed
further in Section 3.4.
A comprehensive paper by Sohn (2005) entitled Long-term projections of non-fuel minerals:
We were wrong, but why? examines production forecasts. Sohn uses economic forecasts,
including an analysis of long term factors influencing demand, to examine the differences
between forecasts and observed values. The role of economic factors in demand and as drivers
of the Australian mineral industry will be addressed in greater detail by Schandl et al.
(forthcoming).

Mineral Futures Discussion Paper October 2009
39
3.1.2. Secondary resources and production
Publicly available forecasts for secondary metal production are more difficult to identify than
for primary production. The US Geological Survey provides current and historical data, but no
quantitative forecasts. Some predictions are given as part of dynamic material flow analyses
described further in 3.2.
Information is available regarding secondary markets through private research firms (e.g. The
Global Market for Metals, Precious Metals, and Recycled Metals, by BCC Research (BCC
Research, 2009)
6
) offering “detailed analysis of the current and forecasted global market
through 2013 for mined and secondary metals and their application markets”.
The comprehensive Stocks and Flows (STAF) project based at Yale University
(http://research.yale.edu/stafproject/) also considers the global stocks (including Australia)
contained in secondary repositories (e.g. cities, landfills) for copper, zinc and steel. However
these figures are a snapshot for a specific year only and do not consider production forecasts
per se.
Econometric modelling of secondary markets is less common than for primary production,
however a recent article considers an econometric model for secondary aluminium (Blomberg
and Söderholm, 2009).
Having considered in this section the various strategies used to explore how the future of
commodity production is forecast and studied, section 3.2 explores how future demands
(including changes to end uses) are currently assessed.
KEY POINTS: PRODUCTION TRENDS & FORECASTS
 Resource/reserve estimates are updated periodically but not forecast into the future
 Production forecasts (volumes and prices) are available for primary production in the
medium term (5-10 years)
o sensitivities explored for primary production forecasts are not radically
different scenarios, but rather high/low bounds around a mid-range forecast
 Forecasts for secondary (recycled) production are less common
 Production forecasts by industry and government agencies generally assume that
more production delivers more economic wealth to Australia and is consequently
preferable, capacity constraints are considered but not environmental constraints.
o however, in the academic literature the implications of peak minerals for both
production and environmental impacts are now being raised
6
At a cost of US$5000

Mineral Futures Discussion Paper October 2009
40
3.2. CONSUMPTION TRENDS & DOWNSTREAM ROADMAPS
Demand for commodities differs from production. Demand (consumption) is met by the
combination of primary and secondary production plus any draw down of stocks that may
have accumulated in a previous year. In addition to forecasting demand trends based on
contemporary factors (e.g. increasing GDP/person in China), roadmaps also explore the future
of demand from the perspective of new technologies, how metals may be used in future and
what services metals could provide into the future.
3.2.1. Demand trends
Demand trends take a broad view of the value and use of particular materials, and where
these materials are being drawn from at present, in order to provide some indications of
where they are likely to be drawn from in the future.
The Development of the Minerals Cycle and the Need for Minerals report (CRU International,
2001) provides an overview of international production, recycling (secondary mineral
production) and the state of markets more generally. It identifies a range of issues that are
ignored by forecasting that is embedded in a national context. These include the growth of
secondary sources of minerals, particularly metals such as aluminium and copper, changes in
demand from established industries, and shifts in demand from developing regions.
The report also provides a very useful perspective on the complexity involved in determining
the social value of minerals/metals in its consideration of employment in the minerals sectors:
The number of persons directly employed in metals and mining, whatever it is, is far
smaller than the number of persons whose livelihoods depend on it. (CRU International
2001, p. 40).
Other publications that forecast production (discussed in Section 3.1), such as the Minerals
Yearbook series, also discuss consumption/demand trends resulting from the rise of China and
India, as do private information providers such as CRU.
3.2.2. Demand (Downstream) Roadmaps
Industry ‘roadmaps’ have been one way in which the future of mining has been considered by
the mining industries of various countries. Generally, these have been focussed on production
requirements, and assess the actions thought necessary to achieve particular goals, through
technological advances in existing processes. Production-oriented roadmaps are referred to as
‘upstream’ roadmaps and these are examined in more detail in section 4.1.
‘Downstream’ roadmaps direct attention towards trends for end-use applications of particular
metals/minerals. By exploring how demand might change in future, downstream roadmaps
have tried to facilitate technological advances that will increase the industry’s share of these
markets.
Some sectors use roadmaps to assess the possibilities of reasserting historical dominance in
particular industrial applications or products. Examples can be seen in the approach taken by
the Automotive Steel Roadmap (American Iron and Steel Institute, 2006) and its targeting of
vehicle components that may be best suited to new lighter weight, high-strength steels. A
more general approach can be characterised as identifying technological changes that will
reduce costs and/or address environmental and social impacts that are likely to affect the
price of the commodity for end-uses, and thereby, the profitability of existing and future
operations.

Mineral Futures Discussion Paper October 2009
41
Both the Copper Applications Roadmap (The International Copper Association, 2007), and the
Building Construction Technology Roadmap (Copper Development Centre Australia Limited,
2004) view significant changes to existing end-uses of copper as an ‘opportunity’. Unlike other
roadmaps, this sectoral application of the roadmap paradigm looks at changes to downstream
applications in a very positive light: as opportunities create new markets rather than trying to
recapture previously held territory. It also assesses the likely market opportunities and
‘enabling’ factors that may be prerequisites for taking advantage of these opportunities
(Copper Development Centre Australia Limited, 2004, p 3-4).
The Building Construction Technology Roadmap considers the “demographic, environmental
and technological factors” that set the parameters for “where and how” people will live in the
future, and outlines the likely implications for copper arising from changes in the construction
and use in homes. This roadmap also provides an example of how the technologies of the
future can serve as a useful reference point for strategic investments of time and research
efforts, as the nature of applications and technologies change significantly over the long term.
3.2.3. Recycling as competition for primary production
The trend towards reducing the impact of waste from consumer goods (including end-of-life-
vehicles, televisions, refrigerators, washing machines and air conditioners) is creating new
dynamics for recycling versus primary production. Japan provides a very instructive example of
how major producers of consumer goods are benefiting from the push to ‘close the loop’ to
avoid environmental problems associated with these goods (Department of Trade and Industry
(UK), 2005), by recycling and reusing these materials in new products. These producers are
effectively stockpiling a range of mineral inputs to supplement their future production cycles.
Such activities are currently focussed on aluminium, steel, iron and copper. The use of precious
metals in printed circuit boards and in LCD television screens is also creating opportunities for
producers of consumer goods to ‘capture’ these resources by recycling. Some of these
minerals include platinum, palladium, tantalum and indium from car electronics from end-of-
life-vehicles (ELV) (Togawa, 2008).
KEY POINTS: DEMAND AND DOWNSTREAM ROADMAPS
 Demand (as for production) is commonly forecast over the medium term.
 Road-mapping exercises bring stakeholders together to agree upon shared goals and a
path to achieving them.
 Downstream roadmaps:
o attempt to forecast demand and anticipate or facilitate developments in end-
uses for minerals.
o take in a comparatively wide range of stakeholders for consultation (i.e.
extraction, processing, primary and secondary transformation, producers of
finished goods)
o can raise questions about industry structure features (e.g. vertical integration)
 Fewer studies consider the material (metals or otherwise) required to provide services
in future
 Few studies give serious consideration to secondary sources as competition to primary
resources in an increasingly energy and water constrained operating environment

Mineral Futures Discussion Paper October 2009
42
3.3. MATERIAL FLOW ANALYSIS
This section discusses literature that tracks the flows of metal quantities from reserves,
through production to consumption and reuse. The aim of Material Flow Analysis (MFA) is the
management of materials (including metals) towards improving resource efficiency (Wrisberg
et al., 2002). MFA tracks only the stocks and flows of one or more materials, but not the social,
economic or environmental impacts of the flows. Literature combining MFA and
environmental impact assessment (e.g. through the use of Life Cycle Assessment) is discussed
in Section 3.4.
Two types of approaches to MFA are described by Wrisberg et al. (2002) as:
 Accounting: often a snapshot of historical flows in a certain year.
 Modelling: either static or dynamic models used for prediction or exploration of future
states.
3.3.1. Snapshot Accounting MFA studies
A series of snapshot accounting studies for copper (Lifset et al., 2002), zinc and steel have
been undertaken by the Stocks and Flows project (http://research.yale.edu/stafproject/). The
research questions posed by this literature are:
 (When) will we run out of metals (in ores)?
 Where are the current stocks of metals (yet to be mined, in use, discarded scrap that is
potentially recoverable, dissipated uses from which recover is not practical)
 What stocks are available for cities to be mines of the future?
The strength and weakness of snapshot accounting is its simplicity. In the same way that a
balance sheet gives a succinct snapshot of a company’s finances, MFA does the same for a
nation or region’s material flows, but without any insight into underlying dynamics and drivers.
The work of the Stocks and Flows project has less of a focus on the economic impacts of metal
cycles, but emphasises geopolitical resource security (Where are the resources we use coming
from? When might we run out?) and distribution (such as inequity between resource
production and consumption between the South and North). In addition to academic research,
industry associations also produce production figures that can constitute a partial MFA study
(often with more of a focus on supply than demand, e.g. www.worldsteel.org,
www.aluminum.org, www.eaa.net).
By way of example, an MFA study from the European Aluminium Association (EAA, 2006) is
shown in Figure 8. The diagram shows the aluminium flows at each stage along the production
and consumption cycle – such representations are especially useful for highlighting efficiencies
at each production stage (i.e. how much aluminium proceeds toward finished product and
how much is a waste process flow).

Mineral Futures Discussion Paper October 2009
43
Figure 8: European aluminium flow 2004 (EAA, 2006)
3.3.2. Modelling MFA studies
Modelling Material Flow Analysis studies have been undertaken relating to both historical and
projected future demand. Generally these have been performed for single commodities such
as copper (Zeltner et al., 1999; Spatari et al., 2005; Ayres et al., 2003) or a collection of
commodities. For example van Vuuren et al. (1999) model iron/steel, and then also a
composite MedAlloy consisting of nickel, tin, lead, silver and copper. McLaren and colleagues
(2000b) use dynamic models for modelling steel recycling cascades. These models assess
future states (in some cases to 2050) based on varying parameters such as future demand,
recycling rate or production efficiency. Their aim is to show how the distribution of material in
the stocks and flows, such as the example in Figure 8, changes over time, and identify the
relationship between controlling variables and the observed changes. There is a divide
between researchers adopting a ‘fixed stock’ paradigm asking, as MFA practitioners do, how
can we manage the stock best, versus the ‘opportunity cost’ (economic) paradigm in which
prices will go up as scarcity increases, and technology develops to access lower grade ores or
as we will explore for new resources.
Whilst many studies are based on single commodities, Reuter (1998) highlights the importance
of studying connected metal cycles, highlighting that for example, the banning of lead has
consequences for copper production, where lead is often a co-product or by-product. The
implication is that where a single commodity is studied, linkages to related sectors and
associated effects should be acknowledged. Where possible, modelling connected cycles is
preferred, however this significantly increases the complexity of the model.
Some MFA studies have been undertaken at the economy scale (i.e. not only for metals, but
for all materials). A materially based model of the future flows in the Australian economy

Mineral Futures Discussion Paper October 2009
44
under different scenarios was developed by Foran and Poldy (2002). Entitled Future Dilemmas,
it developed an economy-wide approach to future stocks and flows, emphasising connections
between sectors. Whilst its strength was its long time horizon, it received criticism from
economists for not including prices in future scenarios. However the authors pointed out that
prices were linked to shorter time frames and that the main value of their work was that it was
based on tangible, physical exchanges of goods.
MFA models can give an insight into the material intensity of alternate future scenarios. At the
global level, the United Nations Environment Program has authored its fourth Global
Environmental Outlooks (GEO-4) (UNEP, 2007), which contain forecasts of material flows under
policy choices of ‘markets first’, ‘security first’, ‘policy first’ and ‘sustainability first’.
Klee and Graedel (2004) note that human action dominates the cycles of the elements whose
usual forms are highly insoluble, while nature dominates the cycles of those that are highly
soluble. As consumption increases so too does human domination, or disturbances, to natural
systems increase. Disturbance to the natural cycles of minerals includes dispersal into the
environment, and so it is necessary to monitor the cycles of minerals for resource supply
analyses, environmental impact assessment, and public policy.
The material flow models are helpful because they provide a picture of the available resources
and how they move through the economy. However one must also consider the social,
economic and environmental consequences of these flows. The environmental impacts of such
flows are discussed in the next section. Social considerations are discussed in Section 5 and the
economic consequences are the topic of a companion paper (Schandl, forthcoming).
KEY POINTS: MATERIAL FLOW ANALYSIS
 Material Flow Analysis (MFA) considers production and consumption, but only with
respect to material flows, not impacts.
 MFA can either be a snapshot for a specific year or underpinned by dynamic models
capable of future forecasts and sensitivity studies to changes in parameters.
 MFA is largely undertaken in the academic research community and the policy
questions it is used to inform include.
o (when) will we run out of metals (in ores)?
o where are the current stocks of metals (yet to be mined, in use, discarded
scrap that are potentially recoverable, dissipated uses from which recover is
not practical)?
o what stocks are available (to consumers) as the mines of the future?

Mineral Futures Discussion Paper October 2009
45
3.4. ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY: MINERALS & METALS
This discussion of the environmental impacts associated with mining, processing and cycling
metal through the economy is divided into two sections: Firstly, impacts over operational
phases in the life of a mine or minerals processing plant; and secondly, a discussion of impacts
along stages of the production and consumption cycle. There are sustainability issues and
linkages between all operational phases and production/consumption stages shown in Figure
9. It helps to highlight that sustainability thinking must extend beyond the mine site to the
total system. A holistic approach opens up scope for industry actors to engage with issues such
as Extended Producer Responsibility and minerals custodianship as integral elements of
sustainability practice.
Figure 9: Operational Phases and Stages of production & consumption cycle
(after Allen et al., 1997)
3.4.1. Assessing operational impacts: Operational phases
Future sustainability in the minerals industry has been assessed prominently at the mine site,
across operational phases and in many cases has been accepted as a definition of minerals
sustainability. However a total systems approach would focus more attention on due
consideration of stewardship across all stages of the production-consumption cycle (Giurco,
2009; McClellan et al., 2009). Bridge (2004) proposes that 'metal use' must be decoupled from
'mineral extraction' to overcome the common policy of countries which promote using virgin
materials to meet demand, instead of utilising mineral stocks which are already circulating in
the economy. The literature pertaining to sustainability topics related to the operational
phases of a mine and minerals processing site is broad. Authors discuss issues ranging from
rehabilitation of mined land (Bell, 2001) and remediation of acid mine drainage (Evangelou
and Zhang, 1995), to cleaner production (Hilson and Murck, 2000; Hilson, 2000a), sustainable
design of mineral processing operations (McClellan et al., 2009), decision support for
sustainability (Petrie et al., 2007) and indicators of minerals sustainability (Azapagic, 2004).
The long-term future of mining practices (with respect to labour, technology and public policy)
affecting resource allocation and rights has been well characterised by Bridge (2004). Efforts to
reduce impacts associated with mineral processing activities have been driven by the Global
Stages of production & consumption cycle
Planning,
Research &
Development
Design &
Construction
De-commissioning
Remediation
& Restoration
RefiningMining
Product
Manufacture
& Use
Waste Management
& Recycling
Pre-operation
phases
Operation
phase
Post-operation
phases
Operational phases

Mineral Futures Discussion Paper October 2009
46
Reporting Initiative, regional constraints (e.g. water scarcity in Australia), and to a limited
extent, emissions trading systems (accounting for carbon intensity) – but these efforts have
generally focussed at the plant scale. Most major mining companies conduct sustainability
reporting (e.g. BHP Billiton, 2008). Often the emphasis is on reducing the environmental
impact per tonne of product (van Berkel, 2007b), with less consideration of the total quantum
of emissions or the services for which the metal product is used (Cooper and Giurco, 2009). An
operation may reduce its greenhouse emissions per tonne of product, but if the tonnage of
product sold increases the total emissions will increase overall. A total systems thinking
approach would pursue policies aimed at reducing absolute demand by opening up new profit
centres along the production-consumption chain. This would provide options for decreasing
the material intensity of services in the economy for which metals are needed, but also
accommodate recycled metal products.
3.4.2. Assessing production consumption impacts: Life cycle stages
Figure 10 highlights the stages of the production-consumption cycle. The topic of sustainable
production and consumption is a significant area of research in its own right, relating to
material inputs, consumption behaviours and the role of policy (see for example, the activities
of the Marrakech Process and the United Nations Environment Programme). This section
provides an overview of the literature that considers the impacts along the production and
consumption chain from a minerals perspective, and which links to a longer-term focus. Much
of the research seeks to explore possibilities for reducing environmental impact along the
production consumption chain.
Figure 10: Stages of the production-consumption cycle
The Mineral Mining and Sustainable Development (MMSD) project (2002) identified the need
for an integrated approach to using minerals as one of nine key challenges facing the minerals
sector. As a guide to implementing such an approach, the MMSD advocates due consideration
of the “use and downstream supply of mineral products” along with the mining and processing
of minerals (MMSD, 2002, p XXI). This expands the assessment of mineral futures to also
Stages of production & consumption cycle
Planning,
Research &
Development
Design &
Construction
De-commissioning
Remediation
& Restoration
RefiningMining
Product
Manufacture
& Use
Pre-operation
phases
Operation
phase
Post-operation
phases
Operational phases
Waste Management
& Recycling

Mineral Futures Discussion Paper October 2009
47
consider patterns of consumption behaviour, culture and the services minerals offer and
contribute to these human characteristics.
Connecting the production and use of mineral-related materials is critical to ensuring
that the minerals sector contributes optimally to sustainable development (MMSD,
2002, p 286).
Additionally, the MMSD (2002) promotes the responsible stewardship of minerals throughout
the entire supply chain, as well as the full internalisation of costs associated with metals and
minerals production.
Decision-making concerning environmental impact issues cannot be delinked from social,
economic, political and other issues, and are reflected, for example, by conflict over land use
(MMSD, 2002, p xvii). The Hunter region provides a current case in point, where conflict is
growing over the issue of whether land is used to grow food or mine coal implications for
regional futures as.
Studies examining improvement along copper life cycle stages have been undertaken with
respect to environmental impacts to 2050 (Giurco and Petrie, 2007; Giurco, 2009), for
phosphorous with respect to efficiency, recycling and institutional arrangements (Cordell et al.,
2009) and for steel (McLaren et al., 2000a) where material, energy and exergy were modelled
to 2019.
Whilst acknowledging the production-consumption cycle has a focus on impacts of mining and
mineral processing, Mudd (2007) has mapped historical mining trends for main commodities.
Future extrapolations of use question the increased environmental impacts associated with
exploiting available resources in Australia (particularly associated with declining ore grades),
and therefore incite a policy attention shift towards total system life cycle assessments if
impacts are to be reduced over the longer-term.
Consideration of stages along the production-consumption cycle is inherent within life cycle
assessment. The literature intersects with life cycle assessment of metals, and several
production processes for metals are contrasted in Norgate et al. (2007) and Mudd (2007). The
difficulty in undertaking a complete life cycle assessment of a metal along the production-
consumption chain is the multiplicity of uses for metals, which in their end use are themselves
combined with numerous other materials. A recent report also focuses on energy use in
production processes but not consumption stages (Lund et al., 2008).
Economic and social considerations along the production-consumption cycle are discussed
further in Schandl (forthcoming), while social issues at the local level are considered further in
Section 5 of this document: Regions in Transition.

Mineral Futures Discussion Paper October 2009
48
KEY POINTS: MINERALS AND ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY
 The existing focus of environmental sustainability has been at the mine or minerals
processing site (e.g. cleaner production, rehabilitating mined land, reducing water and
energy usage per tonne of product)
 The need to focus on impacts along the production and consumption cycle is
acknowledged in MMSD and other high level strategy documents
o some work has been undertaken including Life Cycle Assessment however,
much research remains to be done
o further work is needed to make an environmental sustainability focus the
norm for industry decisions
 The impacts of recycling (which has its own energy requirements, emissions and
technological requirements) have not been the focus of significant current research.

Mineral Futures Discussion Paper October 2009
49
3.5. SUMMARY: CHALLENGES FOR COMMODITY FUTURES
Having explored the way in which commodity futures and impacts of commodity cycles are
currently studied and understood, the next section discusses the future role of technology and
how it is evaluated.
Commodity production and demand estimates are established upon economic theories of
growth and demand, without any consideration of qualitative aspects of growth and human
choice, which are likely to become increasingly powerful influences in global transitions to
possible futures.
Global commodity demand scenarios (Access Economics, 2008a) present business-as-usual
trajectories of mineral commodity demand, established upon estimates of industrial
production growth in the world’s emerging economies and two key drivers of economic
growth – population and US$GDP per head.
Demand estimates expect that both China and India “are carving out growth paths long since
travelled by today’s rich nations” (Access Economics, 2008a, p III), but there are many global
drivers (such as ecosystem collapse, climate change, Peak Oil, increased local ecological and
human health distresses, and global economic crises) that may make these predictions
unreliable and therefore mineral commodity demand may, in fact, fall rather than grow.
Although it is acknowledged that “the future of development in industrialising economies may
not mirror past paths of development due to global warming” (Access Economics, 2008a, p
17), no consideration is given to planetary limits or possible changes in societal values and
cultural norms – considerations deemed necessary to achieve sustainable futures in the Great
Transition essay (Raskin et al., 2002) and the Limits to Growth reports (Meadows et al., 1992;
Meadows et al., 2004; Meadows et al., 1972; Meadows et al., 1974). A precautionary approach
suggests that it is prudent for forecasters to examine current circumstances for signals of
breakdown and to assess the value of policy relevance and projections within alternative
scenarios.
As such, questions requiring further discussion include:
 How will the minerals industry change if global mineral consumption declines?
 How might changes in end uses for minerals (for example, if the world shifts to solar,
hydrogen, nuclear or wind energy) cause changes in the demand for, and profitability
of, particular minerals?
 What are the likely impacts of changes to end uses and/or a narrower band of specific
products on the economic parameters for different extractive techniques?
 How might the shift towards greater recycling and reclamation technologies impact on
the viability of mining?
 What is mineral wealth if extraction processes are constrained by carbon emission
reduction and fuel costs?
 What effect will carbon constraint on burning fossil fuels or Peak Oil have on mineral
futures?
 What impact will carbon emissions and fuel constraints have on the transport of
commodities, and to international markets and trade in minerals?
 How can traditional mineral exporting countries, such as Australia, maintain a strategic
influence as a minerals ‘superpower’ if a shift from ‘virgin ore’ to high levels of
‘product stewardship’ and ‘extended producer responsibility’(EPR) create an
increasingly large and progressively inexpensive pool of resources for use in new
product lines, which might be located outside of this country?

Mineral Futures Discussion Paper October 2009
50
4. TECHNOLOGY FUTURES
4.1. TECHNOLOGY REFLECTS SOCIO-ECOLOGICAL
RELATIONSHIPS
The word ‘technology’ is often interpreted to mean machines or artefacts. More broadly,
technology can also include the social processes, including human relationships with their
environments, through which artefacts are created and maintained. A holistic analysis of the
influence of technology on the future of minerals therefore needs to consider the social,
political, economic and ecological contexts in which technologies develop. This is discussed in
the context of a socio-technical landscape.
The adoption of new technologies responds to the emergence of new disturbances, attractors,
interactions and feedback involving many ecological and social actors across space and time
(Allenby, 2009; Rotmans and Loorbach, 2009; Geels and Schot, 2007). Public participation in
the trajectory of technology development can give greater prominence to the ecological and
social impacts, and social acceptability, of new technology.
Successful adaptation in new situations has often been led by ‘niche occupiers’ or ‘early
adopters’ of technological solutions because they form a different conception of an existing
problem. Consequently, asking different questions and engaging with different stakeholders
can be extremely valuable. Diffusion of innovation is a well-studied aspect of technological
innovation (Rogers, 1962). The concept has more recently been applied in the context of
attitudes and practices, for example in the diffusion of sustainable building practices in
industry (Reardon, 2009).
Research in the Mineral Futures cluster will seek ways that technology can help us answer the
following questions: ’how can we use this mineral in a way that recognises its inherent
properties? How can its uses it in society maximise value and allow potential for future reuse?
How can we recognise the social and environmental impacts of its utilisation?’
TECHNOLOGY FUTURES OUTLINE
This section explores the way future technology use is studied and understood. It:
 Locates technology within the dynamic human socio-ecological relationships, (4.1);
 Discusses emerging extraction technologies that might reduce environmental and
social impacts, boost productivity and enable access to otherwise ‘stranded’ resources
(4.2);
 Considers how technology is assessed and the range of tools that are used to
systematically shape technology design to enhance environmental and community
outcomes. This increases the likelihood that the technologies under development will
be acceptable to the community and be taken up by industry and governments (4.3);
 Concludes by highlighting some challenging issues regarding the placement of
minerals technology futures in a sustainable society that require further discussion
and investigation (4.4).

Mineral Futures Discussion Paper October 2009
51
4.2. UPSTREAM INDUSTRY ROAD MAPS
Like demand-oriented ‘downstream’ roadmaps (discussed in section 3.2.2), production-
oriented ‘upstream’ roadmaps focus on a particular material and those technological
developments that address existing conditions within the industries involved.
How a rod map exercise is conducted depends heavily on the industry undertaking the
exercise. Where one roadmap may relate only to the extraction and refining of ores, others
may examine the full range of the production cycle from finished goods to end-of-life recycling
of post-consumer goods. Differences in the scope of roadmaps reflect the characteristics and
investments of the industry involved. If undertaken as a national industry roadmap, it is also
likely to reflect the nation’s investment in the industry as a manifestation of national wealth.
A comparison of two nationally based aluminium roadmaps demonstrates the potential
differences. The first, Aluminium Technology Roadmap (2000) produced in a Canadian
industry-government partnership, focussed on technology related to extraction and primary
production to reflect the heavy investment of Canadian industry in these areas. The second
roadmap, Aluminum Technology Roadmap (The Aluminum Association Inc., 2001) undertaken
as a partnership between US industry and government, provides a much broader strategy for
technological development. It addresses the US industry’s engagement in refining, primary
material production from ores, finished products and recycling from scrap. This diversity was
captured because of the industry’s broader engagement in these activities.
Both of the aforementioned roadmaps evaluate the prospects for technologies that reduce
costs of production. Technology is expected to assist in reducing the cost of labour (through
greater automation), and in reducing the current costs of identifying, extracting and processing
materials. Although environmental and social effects of production are more of a focus for
discussion in upstream roadmaps, than is the case with downstream roadmaps.
The largest driver for the considerations discussed here appears to be the need to reduce
costs. The copper technology roadmap (AMIRA, 2004) is an upstream roadmap linked to the
downstream copper applications roadmap discussed earlier in section 3.2. It seeks to lower the
production costs and energy use with a balance of triple bottom line impacts, whilst managing
technological risk and improving health and safety in the industry.
Challenges less extensively considered in roadmaps include those that are less susceptible to
resolution through technological development. Although it may seem reasonable to focus only
on the benefits of technological development, it is worth noting that both copper and
aluminium roadmaps indicate that the market is oversupplied despite increasing consumption,
and that there appears to be no consideration of how this should be understood and
addressed by stakeholders. The basic assumption of both upstream and downstream
roadmaps is that reducing costs will improve the industry’s capacity to market what is
produced.
Connections to Downstream Applications
As discussed earlier, upstream roadmaps, which consider the impact of changes and
developments in downstream applications, appear to be a characteristic of an industry that is
highly integrated. This approach can be seen in the roadmaps of the copper industry discussed
earlier.

Mineral Futures Discussion Paper October 2009
52
KEY POINTS: UPSTREAM ROADMAPS
 The balance of national (e.g. aluminium) vs international (e.g. copper) focus depends
on material
o Industry structure features – concern is for the costs of developing technology
that addresses problems that are experienced by all (e.g. pre-competitive R&D
collaboration)
o Stakeholder consultation varies in breadth – also workshop based.
 Upstream roadmaps are less outward looking, in a market sense, than downstream
roadmaps, but they appear to assume that the goal of greater production volume is
worthwhile despite their identification of over-supply and lower returns.
 Some pay more attention than others to the inputs to their activities (i.e. energy and
water).
4.3. EMERGING EXTRACTION TECHNOLOGIES
There are a range of technologies that are emerging that seek to access ‘stranded’ (previously
inaccessible) resources. These technologies, many of which are undergoing current research
and development or in the early stages of uptake, are expanding the mineral resources
landscape in the following ways:
New extraction methods: Unconventional technologies to access conventional resources
(e.g. coal seam gas, oil sands, oil shale, coal to liquids), which include techniques like phyto-
mining (using plants to extract metals and minerals), and hydrometallurgy (including vat
leaching, heap leaching of sulphide and oxide mineralogy and in-situ leaching).
Access to remote and difficult ores: technologies that improve the accessibility of ores in
deep land-based locations (e.g. key-hole mining and underground mechanical processing)
or at/under the deep oceans.
Processing of complex ores: technologies to extract resources from ores with impurities or
in complex mineralogy.
Improved extraction effectiveness: technologies to maximise the extraction of ore at
increasingly lower grades.
Improved extraction efficiency: technologies that improve the economics of resource
extraction such as remote tele-operations and mine automation.
New and expanded markets: Innovations and technologies that create new markets for
conventional resources (e.g. electric drive vehicles have the potential to expand the market
for fixed energy production and battery components, and advances in mobile
telecommunication have increased demand for tantalum and niobium) and demand for
new resources.
Expansion of service infrastructure: New infrastructure that makes resources more
economic to develop. The proximity of a resource to rail, ports, electricity, natural gas etc,
is a major factor in the economics of extraction and processing.
Expansion of resource base: exploration technologies to locate resources (e.g. innovations
in ‘induced polarisation geophysics’ to see beneath regolith cover, regolith bio-
geochemistry, three dimensional mapping and improved processing of data).
Reduction of side-effects: technologies that reduce unwanted environmental or social
impacts can improve the acceptability of a technology and thus the technology’s uptake.

Mineral Futures Discussion Paper October 2009
53
For example, thorium reactors may produce energy with decreased security risks; carbon
capture and storage/sequestration may capture greenhouse gas emissions from fossil fuels;
mine methane drainage may reduce fugitive emissions from coal mining; biomass blast
furnace reductants may replace coal in the coking of iron-ore; improved amenity from
noise reduced mine trucks; and, end of pipe technology such as scrubbers to reduce waste
emissions.
New waste management and rehabilitation methods: innovations in waste management
and rehabilitation may improve the feasibility and acceptability of resource extraction at
some locations (e.g., deep sea tailings placement, where tailings are disposed below the
ocean thermocline, is argued by advocates to improve the feasibility of operations in steep
or limited terrain unsuitable for conventional tailings; paste and thickened tailings methods
can drastically reduce water loss to tailings and improve tailings stability; desalination and
reverse osmosis can increase water management options; and phyto-remediation, the use
of plants to treat environmental problems, can improve rehabilitation outcomes).
Recovery of resources from wastes: improved processing efficiency can provide the means
by which ore can be recovered from the reprocessing of mine waste, providing an
economic opportunity to rehabilitate historical sites to stable landforms. Recycling, mineral
stewardship and product stewardship can recover resources after use (e.g. tantalum from
mobile phones; aluminium from beverage containers).
Utilisation of wastes as resources: extraction and processing waste streams may be an
alternate source of resources (e.g. fly ash for use in cement; and red mud, a by-product of
aluminium production, for use as a soil conditioner).
Each of these developments may have profound implications on mineral futures. Automation,
and specifically remote tele-operation, has the potential to lead to cost savings and production
efficiencies, and deliver better health and safety outcomes. However a likely collateral impact
will be a reduction in direct employment opportunities at the local and regional level,
particularly in operator roles such as truck and train driving. Indigenous people in mining
regions, in particular, may be adversely impacted by large-scale automation, given that their
main point of entry into mining and the wider workforce is typically through jobs such as truck
driving, which are likely to be amongst the first to be automated. This, in turn, presents
challenges for resource developers as a growing number of land use agreements contain
commitments by mining companies to provide employment and training opportunities for
Indigenous people and large-scale automation may make it difficult to honour these
commitments.
4.4. TECHNOLOGY FUTURES ASSESSMENT
With the development of new technology, there is a need to assess the social impact, risks and
opportunities that the technology presents to community and industry, and to consider these
insights in the design process. The aim of such an assessment is to shape technology design to
enhance environmental and community outcomes and thus increase the likelihood that the
technologies under development will be acceptable to the community. Technology futures
analysis “represents any systematic process to produce judgements about emerging
technology characteristics, development pathways, and potential impacts of a technology into
the future” (Porter et al. 2004, p 288). Analysis may include foresight to identify future
technology developments and implications, forecasting to describe impacts at a point in the
future and assessment to scope, analyse and respond to impacts.

Mineral Futures Discussion Paper October 2009
54
Community perceptions can have significant implications for the uptake of technical processes
in the minerals industry, including where investment should be directed. For example, public
concern about the water and energy demands and the climate change impacts of minerals
production may be a powerful driver of investment into technologies to support EPR and
recycling, as well as renewable energy technologies such as solar thermal, wind and
geothermal.
If public concern about a technology and/or a proposed new use of by-products is aroused,
this can result in negative publicity, delays in obtaining regulatory approval, increased
litigation, substantial reputational damage, and in extreme cases, loss of the ‘social license to
operate’. If technologists can understand and anticipate these factors, they will be better
placed to develop technologies that meet public acceptance in a future where sustainability
will be highly valued.
Assessments may utilise multiple methods, both qualitative and quantitative, including
stakeholder analysis, risk assessments and scenario analysis, and may examine the social,
economic, political and environmental domains. Technology assessments employ both
technical and participatory approaches. They differ to project level impact assessments, which
are undertaken with established and well-defined technology, a specific local and regional
context and a tangible group of stakeholders. Technology assessments overcome the
challenges of variable and changing technologies, unknown local and future contexts, and an
unspecified community, by employing deliberative methodologies to facilitate community
participation in locations where similar technology has been situated or in hypothetical
situations; compare the technology under analysis to alternatives and future scenarios; and
facilitate a process for incorporating these insights into the development, design and
communication of the technology under development.
Technology assessment has a long history as a method to inform research, development and
decision-making. Since the 1970s the United States Office of Technology Assessment provided
technology analysis for the US congress to guide policy. The Office was disbanded in 1995, but
the Federation of American Scientists hosts an archive of published material
(http://fas.org/ota/). The European Union continues to undertake such analyses through the
European Parliamentary Technology Assessment Network and the Science and Technology
Options Assessment. In 2007 the European Union introduced regulation on Registration,
Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH) that requires industry to assess
and manage the risks of chemicals.
Technological uptake by industry and government has been slow in Australia, despite a
number of very prominent examples where technologies have addressed controversy when
implemented. In the Australian minerals industry in situ leaching of uranium, the development
of oil shale, and by products such as alkaloam are examples of technological controversies
facing public opposition. In at least one case, opposition resulted in the abandonment of the
development (Barclay et al., 2009). A current Australian Research Council-funded project,
Technology Assessment in Social Context, is seeking to advance technology assessment in
Australia, particularly in the area of nano and food technologies. There is a need to extend
such approaches to the development of technology in the Australian minerals industry, and
this need will be addressed in the Mineral Futures Collaboration Cluster.

Mineral Futures Discussion Paper October 2009
55
4.5. CHALLENGES: TECHNOLOGY FUTURES
K
ey
points and remaining challenges for technology futures include:
 The challenge of ensuring stakeholders and policy makers consider technologies and
technological transitions within the broader socio-technical system;
 Upstream technology roadmaps largely focus on technological solutions that can
increase primary production, rather than the future potential of new technologies to
increase production of recycled metals:
o if society is to move to lower consumption in a more dematerialised economy,
technologies that incorporate design for environmental principles and support
closed-loop life cycles involving reuse and recycling should be an increasing
focus of technological innovation;
 Emerging technologies are expanding the mineral resources landscape in these ways:
o new extraction methods;
o processing complex ores;
o improving extraction efficiency;
o expanding markets;
o expanding service infrastructure (roads, rail, ports, energy, water);
o expanding the resource base through better exploration technologies;
o reducing environmental and social impacts;
o new waste management methods;
o recovering resources from waste and using wastes as resources