Harmful mining activities, environmental impacts and effects in the mining communities in South Africa: a critical perspective

Abstract

In South Africa, the right to a clean environment is constitutionally guaranteed. However, this right is being violated on a daily basis by the mining companies who degrade and harm the environment in the communities they operate. Even though laws have been put in place to regulate, protect and deter degradation, the reality is that the mining companies have been found wanting several times in discharging their constitutional obligations not to degrade and harm the environment. This paper examines impacts and effects of the mining activities. It also looks at the legislative interventions that have been put in place to serve as checks against the mining companies and provides insights on how they are being used to regulate harmful mining practices.

Full text

“Harmful mining activities, environmental impacts and
effects in the mining communities in South Africa: a
critical perspective”
AUTHORS Makua M. Pretty, Kola O. Odeku
ARTICLE INFO
Makua M. Pretty and Kola O. Odeku (2017). Harmful
mining activities, environmental impacts and effects in
the mining communities in South Africa: a critical
perspective.
Environmental Economics (open-access)
,
8
(4), 14-24. doi:10.21511/ee.08(4).2017.02
DOI http://dx.doi.org/10.21511/ee.08(4).2017.02
RELEASED ON Tuesday, 05 December 2017
RECEIVED ON Sunday, 10 September 2017
ACCEPTED ON Friday, 20 October 2017
LICENSE
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons
Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License
JOURNAL "Environmental Economics (open-access)"
ISSN PRINT 1998-6041
ISSN ONLINE 1998-605X
PUBLISHER LLC “Consulting Publishing Company “Business
Perspectives”
NUMBER OF
REFERENCES
98
NUMBER OF FIGURES
0
NUMBER OF TABLES
0
© The author(s) 2017. This publication is an open access article.
businessperspectives.org

Environmental Economics, Volume 8, Issue 4, 2017
14
Makua M. Pretty (South Africa), Kola O. Odeku (South Africa)
Harmful mining activities, environmental impacts and effects
in the mining communities in South Africa: a critical perspective
Abstract
In South Africa, the right to a clean environment is constitutionally guaranteed. However, this right is being violated on
a daily basis by the mining companies who degrade and harm the environment in the communities they operate. Even
though laws have been put in place to regulate, protect and deter degradation, the reality is that the mining companies
have been found wanting several times in discharging their constitutional obligations not to degrade and harm the
environment. This paper examines impacts and effects of the mining activities. It also looks at the legislative
interventions that have been put in place to serve as checks against the mining companies and provides insights on how
they are being used to regulate harmful mining practices.
Keywords: harmful mining, environmental degradation, mining community, sustainability, regulations, South Africa.
JEL Classification: Q56, Q58, L71.
Received on: 10th of September, 2017.
Accepted on: 20th of October, 2017.
Introduction 2
In South Africa, the mining industry plays a vital
role in the economic growth and development of the
country (Hamann, 2003). There are different types
of natural mineral resources in South Africa and
they serve as a key driver of the country’s social
economic growth and development (Hamann,
2004). Undoubtedly, mining provides jobs, grows
the economy and builds trading relations with the
rest of the world. However, when mining is done
irresponsibly, it will definitely impact the
environment and cause harm and irreparable
damages (Bolong, 2016). In South Africa, poor
mining operations are costing the country its major
asset and resource which is the environment
(Downing, 2002). Mining operations usually result
in environmental degradation in the mining
communities if mine owners do not adhere to
regulations that have been put in place to ensure that
the environment is not harmed and degraded during
these activities (White, 2013). The harm and
degradation affect the health and wellbeing of
individuals, groups and communities as a result of
the toxic environments created by the mining
companies. Furthermore, if mining is done
irresponsibly, it can devastate local ecosystems and
destroy traditional cultures and livelihoods and these
are common in many communities in South Africa
(Duri, 2016).
 Makua M. Pretty, Kola O. Odeku, 2017.
Makua M. Pretty, Faculty of Management and Law, University of
Limpopo, Turfloop, South Africa.
Kola O. Odeku, Faculty of Management and Law, University of
Limpopo, Turfloop, South Africa.
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the
Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International
license, which permits re-use, distribution, and reproduction, provided
the materials aren’t used for commercial purposes and the original work
is properly cited.
Sometimes, the impacts are so sever to the extent
that a whole community could be deserted thereby
creating a ‘ghost towns’ after the departure of
mining company and this is usually the enduring
image and legacy of extractive industry (Haney &
Shkaratan, 2003). Therefore, mining has significant
social and environmental ramifications directly
related to ecological wellbeing and human health
(Cullen-Unsworth, 2014). It is against the backdrop
of this that the mining companies need to pursue
actions that mitigate harmful impacts on the
environment while conducting extractive activities
(Owen & Kemp, 2013). There is a need to be
mindful of the fact that protection of the natural
environment will sustain long-term economic
growth. This paper accentuates that the extractions
of natural minerals should be done responsibly and
sensibly (Mannion, 2014). Against the backdrop of
these harmful mining activities resulting in
environmental harm, degradation and
contamination, this paper discusses the impact of
poor mining activities and legislation in place to
ensure that mining is done responsibly and sensibly.
This is critically imperative in order to protect
vulnerable population groups and the communities
from environmental harm, degradation and
contamination being what resource extraction leave
behind and their devastating impacts upon local
areas now and into the future (White, 2013).
1. Problem statement
Since the late 19th century, South Africa has
exploited its mineral wealth with little or no regard
for the environment (Death & Politikon, 2014).
From an environmental perspective, South Africa
faces several crucial environmental challenges,
such as environmental harm, degradation and

Environmental Economics, Volume 8, Issue 4, 2017
15
contamination caused by the failure of the mining
companies to act responsibly while conducting their
business. Yet, to a large extent, the accountability
and sanctions of the extractive industry for the
impact and consequences of environmental
degradation in mining communities has been very
poor. Against the backdrop of this irresponsible
mining business, communities, ecosystems and the
people in the areas they operate are being negatively
impacted on a daily basis. Consequently, there is
need to understand the extent of damage poor
mining operations impacts on the environment and
to strengthen compliance and implementation by
using the existing laws to hold perpetrators
accountable.
2. Literature review
Virtually all mining literature attest to the fact that
mining should be done in a sustainable way and
manner (Danielson, 2006). However, the concern is
that “the socio-economic upliftment that should
logically follow the implementation of ensuring that
mining operation is conduct responsibly is not
visible in many mining areas and communities
where the mining companies operate” (Ololade &
Annegarn, 2003). The study of Ololade and
Annegarn (2003) found out that the environmental
and social costs associated with mining were high,
while economic benefits to surrounding
communities were low”. Ololade and Annegarn
(2003) also documented that “the perceptions of
community and corporations were found to contrast
sharply: the reality experienced by community
members fell well short of the optimistic scenarios
presented in the corporate social responsibility
reports of the mining companies, which has
implications for the mining industry in the area”.
Accordingly, for there to be a sustainable mining
path, the companies need to change their mind set
and stop the business as usual syndrome by altering
their operations onto a genuine sustainable path
(Ololade & Annegarn, 2003).
More importantly, Abuya’s (2006) work identified
mine-related conflicts prevalent in the mining
communities such as “land ownership; unfair
compensation; inequitable resource distribution;
environmental degradation; mine-induced poverty;
and conflict over human rights abuses”. Conflicts
usually occur in the mining communities because
the people tend to believe that mine developers will
finance tangible projects and services such as
schools, hospitals, roads, water and so on but, in
most cases, mine companies usually renege on their
promises and failed to honor the promises made to
the members of the communities (Nkadimeng,
2016). The product of this is the incessant vicious
protests which sometimes result to the disruption of
mining activities in the community. For there to be a
suitable mining, companies must ensure that they
fulfill their social responsibility to the community
and the environment in order to minimize conflicts
(Tello, 2015).
South Africa government has introduced pieces of
legislation on the issue of responsible and sensible
mining and the protection of the integrity of the
environment, however there seems to be poor
implementation hence the act of degradation
continues (Amechi, 2009). All organs of state must
cooperate and work together with regard to ensuring
that the environment is protected from harm and
degradation. Conversely, for instance, instead of
cooperating with the other department to protect the
environment from being harmed, the Department of
Mineral Resources (DMR) in Mpumalanga, granted
prospecting and mining rights even in the face of
vehement opposition from other organs of state like
conservation and tourism authorities. Mpumalanga
is experiencing the worst environmental degradation
caused by mining activities in the whole of South
Africa as most of its land is no longer conducive for
farming, living and there are water pollution and
shortage, as well as a result of destructive mining
activities. The DMR is also responsible for
monitoring the environmental impacts of mining but
it is failing dismally at this task. The Department of
Environmental and Water Affairs, and local and the
district municipalities that have integral role to play
in regulation that effectively balances the province’s
different priorities, are either unwilling or incapable
of making a dent in this onslaught (Davies, 2014).
The DMR in Mpumalanga generally accepts
applications for rights, no matter how sensitive or
protected the area in which mining is proposed. For
example, Mabola protected environment in the
Wakkerstroom is one of the five important water
source in Mpumalanga and it was proclaimed
protected environment, however Atha-Africa
Ventures (Pty) Ltd group, was granted the right to
mine coal from the area by DMR despite the
opposition of the environmental and water
authorities (Cullinan, 2015). This means that the so-
called protected area does not enjoy the benefits of
being protected. The Minister of Mineral Resources
has the power to declare the operation invalid, but
has so far refused to do so without a valid reason or
communication to the communities affected by the
activities.
The permission to mine which was granted to Atha-
Africa Ventures (Pty) Ltds a demonstration of the
failure of parties involved working together.

Environmental Economics, Volume 8, Issue 4, 2017
16
Organizations such as Centre for Environmental
Rights and The Mpumalanga Tourism and Parks
agency (an organ of state) have called on
government to undertake an assessment of the
cumulative impacts of mining on the environment.
Relevant government departments are also implored
to agree to restrictmining in areas which contain
critical water sources and biodiversity, or which are
important for South Africa’s future food security
(Davies, 2014).
According to Hassan (2001), “good environmental
governance is an important pillar in the global
partnership for sustainable development”.
Environmental governance may be described “as the
manner in which people exercise authority over
nature (Hassan, 2001)”. It is pertinent to mention
that “natural resource management was
internationalized by the 1972 Stockholm
Declaration 2004, echoing the earlier
internationalization of human rights by the 1948
Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR)
UN General Assembly in Paris 10 December 1948”
(Hassan, 2001). The concept of human right to a
healthy environment developed from the first
principle of the Stockholm Declaration which states
that “man has the fundamental right to freedom,
equality and permits a life of dignity and well-being,
and he bears a solemn responsibility to protect and
improve the environment for present and future
generations” (Stockholm Declaration Principle 1).
The Stockholm Declaration does not specify the
right to a healthy environment, as such, but it does
claim the right to adequate conditions of life in a
temporal perspective to safeguard the environment
for future generations (Hiskes, 2012). It follows that
a healthy environment is necessary for the
appreciation of other human rights (Lewis, 2013).
Section 24 of the South African Constitution
embodies the right to a healthy environment and to
conservation of the environment.
Good environmental governance would begin with a
democratic dispensation that allows full
participation of civil society in the running and
administration of its affairs (Hassan, 2001). Such a
dispensation enables national and provincial
legislatures to respond to the emerging needs of
society for general and specific regimes and laws for
environmental protection and sustainable
development (Van Rensburg & Naude, 2007). In
order to protect the environment from being harmed
and degraded, there must be strong willingness to
ensure effective and efficient management and as
such, according to Hassan (2001), “legislation is a
major tool for achieving good environmental
management, rule of law, respect for human rights
and a free and independent judiciary are essential
for protecting and enforcing environmental
protection regimes” (Hassan, 2001). The question is
whether mining companies are adhering to the
elements of good environment governance with
respect to mitigation of the adverse effects of
mining activities on local communities (Truter,
2011). The court in South Africa had pronounced on
the need for ensuring the proper protection of the
environment while pursuing socio-economic
activities or mining as adumbrated in the case of
Fuel Retailers Association of Southern Africa v
Director-General: Environmental Management,
Department of Agriculture, Conservation and
Environment, Mpumalanga Province and Others
(CCT67/06) [2007] ZACC 13; 2007 (10) BCLR
1059 (CC); 2007 (6) SA 4 (CC) (7 June 2007)
where the constitutional court held that “the essence
of sustainable development is balanced integration
of socio-economic development and environmental
priorities and norms. Economic sustainability is thus
not part of a check-list that has to be ticked off as a
separate item in the sustainable development
enquiry. Rather, it is an element that takes on
significance to the extent that it implicates the
environment. When economic development
potentially threatens the environment it becomes
relevant to NEMA. Only then does it become a
material ingredient to be put in the scales of a
NEMA evaluation”. This paper seek to show that
some of the mining companies are not adhering to
good government in their operations and as such
they should be sanctioned using existing legislation
that talk to the issues of protection of the
environment even when conducting extractive
activities.
3. The impacts and effects of mining on the
community they operate
The awful living conditions of mine-affected
communities and the shocking failure of mining
companies to meaningfully or positively engage
with them are clear testimony to irresponsible
mining activities (Sarkar et al., 2010). The
devastating impact of mining on land; the impact of
air, water and soil pollution on farming activities
and human health; mining companies’ poor
compliance with legal and regulatory requirements
for environmental protection (Bridge, 2004). The
almost total lack of compliance monitoring and
enforcement by the Department of Mineral
resources and the “extremely cavalier attitude of the
South African mining industry towards the closure
of mines and the rehabilitation of the environment is
what causes these small communities to suffer the

Environmental Economics, Volume 8, Issue 4, 2017
17
fate imposed upon them by the mining companies”
(Bench Marks Foundation: Policy Gap 9 South
African coal mining, August 2014). The impacts
and effects of poor and harmful mining activities are
numerous and some are discussed below.
3.1. Impact and effect of harmful mining. Bad
mining practices can ignite fires which can burn for
decades, releasing fly ash and smoke laden with
greenhouse gasses and toxic chemicals (Dontala et
al., 2015). Harmful dust inhalation causes black
lung disease among miners and those who live
nearby, and mine accidents kill thousands every
year (Eisler, 2003). Harmful mining could displace
whole communities, forcing them off their land due
to expanding mines, fires, subsidence and
contaminated water supplies (Goswami, 2014).
In some cases, the environment will be toxic to the
extent that people in the communities are forced to
evacuate their homes as the conditions of the
degraded environment and land worsen (Warner et
al., 2010). Their livestocks die and they are not able
to grow crops on the land (Yu et al., 2011). Ground
water decreases and rivers dry up and the cloud of
black dust lingers in the chemically polluted air and
the noise from the huge trucks and the blasting
(Joseph, 2005). Sometimes, even relocating the
community to another location does not deter the
impact of mining, especially if the new location is
still in close proximity to the mining area (Gupta &
Lehal, 2009). For example, Mmadithlokwa village
located in Marikana was relocated by Tharisa
Minerals just a few kilometers from the mining
operations and now the community is negatively
impacted by these mining activities, some residents
are relocating from the chosen area as they no
longer feel safe (Tunatazama, 2017). Those who are
too poor to rebuild their homes have remained
because they have no other option, the mine requires
prove that indeed the dilapidation of the houses are
caused by the mining activities and the residents
have nothing to show except for their cracked
houses which are not enough for the company to
carry the responsibility of relocating them. This
problem can be avoided by proper communication
with the communities and relocation of the
community to newly developed areas distant from
the mining area.
3.2. Strip mining. There are two widely used ways
of mining: strip mining and underground mining.
Strip mining (also known as open cast, mountaintop
or surface mining) involves scraping away earth and
rocks to get to coal buried near the surface (Montrie,
2001). In many cases, mountains are literally blasted
apart to reach thin mineral seams within, leaving
permanent scars on the landscape (Dontala et al.,
2017). Even though it is highly destructive,
industries often prefers this methods it requires less
labour and yields more mineral-coal than
underground mining. Underground mining will
require the input of engineers to ensure that it is safe
for mineworkers to go underground to extract the
resource.
3.2.1. Impacts of strip mining. Strip mining destroys
landscapes, forests and wildlife habitats at the site of
the mine when trees, plants, and topsoil are cleared
from the mining area (Brennan et al., 2005). This in
turn leads to soil erosion and destruction of
agricultural land. Rain can wash the loosened top
soil into streams that becomes sediments polluting
waterways which can hurt fish and smother plant
life downstream. It also causes disfiguration of river
channels (Maya, 2014). There is also an increased
risk of chemical contamination of ground water
when minerals in upturned earth seep into the water
table, and watersheds are destroyed when disfigured
land loses the water it once held (Witze & Kanipe,
2015). Strip mining causes dust and noise pollution
when top soil is disrupted with heavy machinery and
coal dust is created in mines (Igoe, 2014). The result
of all this is barren land that stays contaminated
long after a mine shuts down (Rai, 2015).
Although legal regulations can be used to ensure
that the land is rehabilitated and restored, as well to
enforce compliance of the other processes of
restoration of the land, undoing all the
environmental damages to water supplies, destroyed
habitats, and poor air quality is a long and
problematic task (Davies, 2014). Oftentimes the
land degraded is vast. For example, in Emalahleni,
Witbank, coal mining has degraded the quality of an
estimated 3.2 million hectares of land.The overall
restoration rate (the ratio of reclaimed land area to
the total degraded land area) of mine wasteland was
only about 10-12 percent (Johnson & Hallberg,
2005).
3.3. Underground mining. Underground
miningallows mining companies to extract deeper
deposits of mineral resource and this is viewed as
less destructive than strip mining. Nevertheless, it
still causes widespread damage to the environment.
In room-and-pillar mines, columns of coal used as
pillars are left to support the ground above during
the initial mining process, then they are often taken
out and the mine is left to collapse, which is known
as subsidence. For instance, Lannex mine in
Eerstegeluk, Steelpoort just outside of Burgersfortin
South Africa experienced one of the most
frightening moments in the area when a mountain
sunk in while the community watched in fear. This
according to reports was due to the collapse of

Environmental Economics, Volume 8, Issue 4, 2017
18
pillars that help to keep the table rock intact and
possible for mine workers to work underground
(Motseo, 2013).
3.4. Common health threats posed by mining.
Pneumoconiosis, also known as the black lung
disease or coal worker’s pneumoconiosis (CWP),
common in miners is caused by breathing in coal
dust and carbon, which harden the lungs (Dontala et
al., 2015). Cardiopulmonary disease, chronic
obstructive pulmonary disease, hypertension, lung
disease, and kidney disease have been found in
higher-than-normal rates among residents who live
near coal mines (Hendry & Ahem, 2008). In
Witbank, there have been reports that the residents
suffer from the black lung disease caused by
inhaling the air infested with the residue dust from
the coal.
4. Prohibition of environmental degradation in
the mining communities
South Africa has numerous environmental laws and
policies in place which are frequently amended for
effective and efficient management and protection
of the environment (Fuggle & Rabie, 2009). Some
of these are discussed below.
4.1. Mineral Act 50 of 1991. The Mineral Act 50 of
1991 (MA) came into force on 1 January 1992. The
goal of the MA was to achieve uniform regulation
of minerals. As opposed to the previous system of
regulatory control through conferral of rights. The
MA aimed to achieve the regulatory objectives of
the state by imposing a system of authorization. It
simplified the complex multiplicity of the
prospecting, mining and surface right forms that had
existed before its commencement. It also
consolidated the rules regarding the exercise of
mineral rights and those regarding the achievement
of prescribed health and safety standards.
Furthermore, it dealt with rehabilitation, surface use
and acquisition of land and payment of
compensation in respect to open-cast mining
operations, as well as underground mining
operations and prospecting or mineral recovery
operations in respect of tailings (Ashton et al.,
2001). All pre-existing classification of minerals
became irrelevant with the introduction of the MA.
The Act referred to minerals and land in uniform
fashion. The MA pursued a trinity of objectives,
namely (i) optimal utilization of country’s mineral
resources; (ii) mining safety and health; and (iii)
rehabilitation. It was the task of government to
regulate the prospecting, optimal exploitation,
processing and utilization of miners and to ensure
rehabilitation of the land and safe mining practices.
Its stated purpose was to ensure adherence to these
principles by imposing a system of authorizations.
Thereafter, only three different forms of
authorizations namely prospecting permits, mining
permits and mining licenses existed.
This constituted a significant reorientation of the
previous dispensation, which acknowledged about
40 types of permits, licenses, concessions and so on.
No person could prospect for minerals without
having been granted the necessary authorization in
accordance with the section 5(2) of MA. The
applicant had to provide proof of the right to the
mineral and had to comply with certain
environmental requirements pertaining to
rehabilitation of surface disturbances and the ability
to rehabilitate such disturbances. The applicant also
had to demonstrate the ability to prospect in a
healthy and safe manner to the satisfaction of the
Chief Inspector of Mines.
One of the aims of the MA was surface
rehabilitation. Accordingly, the Act placed a
particular focus on environmental regulation, and
the system of authorizations operated to support the
goal of surface rehabilitation in terms of subsection
38 to 42, read where appropriate with section 9 of
the MA. Initially these provisions were
supplemented by regulations in terms of Mines and
Works Act 27 of 1956 which remained intact until
more stringent and adequate programs were
promulgated to replace them in 1993. The ability to
rehabilitate is relevant for applications of mining
rights. Rehabilitation was a factor considered in
determining whether additional prospecting permits
on mining authorizations could be issued in respect
of land permits or authorizations that had already
been issued. Moreover, non-compliance with the
rehabilitation duties will result in the compulsory
suspension or cancellation of the prospecting permit
or authorization.
The rehabilitation provisions in the MA
exhaustively regulated the discretion of the officials
assigned with considering applications for
prospecting permits and mining authorizations to
make environmentally sound decisions.
4.2. The Constitution of the Republic of South
Africa, 1996. The Constitution of South Africa
supports the initiative to protect and preserve the
environment and life. It states that everyone has the
right- to an environment that is not harmful to their
health or wellbeing (section 24(a)). To have the
environment protected, for the benefit of present and
future generations, (section 24(b)(i)) of the
constitution promotes conservation; section
24(b)(ii)); secures ecologically sustainable
development and use of natural resources while

Environmental Economics, Volume 8, Issue 4, 2017
19
promoting justifiable economic and social
development. The Constitution is the supreme law
of the country and as such it promotes the right to
clean environment and the government and its
institutions have obligations to protect, prevent and
promote this right.
4.3. National Environmental Management Act
107 of 1998 (NEMA). The purpose of this Act is to
provide for co-operative and environmental
governance by establishing principles for decision-
making on matters affecting the environment and
institutions that will promote co-operative
governance and procedures for co-coordinating
environmental functions exercised by organs of
state; and to provide for matters connected therewith
in terms of section 12 of NEMA. NEMA also
provides for implementation and management plans
and the purposes are to (a) co-ordinate and
harmonize the environmental policies, plans,
programmes and decisions of the various national
departments that exercise functions that may affect
the environment or are entrusted with powers and
duties aimed at the achievement and promotion of
clean environment in terms of section 12 (1) (a) of
NEMA. To protect the sustainable environment,
and the provincial and local spheres of government,
in order to (i) minimize the duplication of
procedures and functions; and (ii) promote
consistency in the exercise of functions that may
affect the environment (section 12 (1)(a)(i) &(ii));
(b) give effect to the principle of co-operative
government in Chapter 3 of the Constitution
(section 12 (1)(a)(ii)); (c) secure the protection of
the environment across the country as a whole
(section 12 (1)(a)(ii).): (d) prevent unreasonable
actions by provinces in respect of the environment
that are prejudicial to the economic or health
interests of other provinces orthe country as a whole
(section 12 (1)(a)); and (e) enable the Minister to
monitor the achievement, promotion, and protection
of a sustainable environment (section 12(1)(a)). The
South African Constitutional court has however
warned that the submission of environmental
management plan is not enough thus in the case of
Bengwenyama Minerals (Pty) Ltd and Others v
Genorah Resources (Pty) Ltd and Others (CCT
39/10) [2010] ZACC 26; 2011 (4) SA 113 (CC);
2011 (3) BCLR 229 (CC) (30 November 2010).
Para 77, the Constitutional court held that “…an
applicant who applies for the granting of a
prospecting right needs to submit an environmental
management plan(not a programme), and secondly
because the section explicitly states that the granting
of the prospecting right only becomes-effective on
approval of the program. It obviously relates to the
implementation of the prospecting operation, not its
approval. Approval of the prospecting operation is
dependent on an assessment that the operation will
not result in unacceptable pollution, ecological
degradation or damage to the environment”.
Many inhabitants in the mining communities in
South Africa live in an environment that is harmful
to their health and well-being (McDonald, 2004), as
a result of environmentally harmful practices. These
practices are contrary to section 24(1) (b) of the
Constitution which provides that everyone has the
right to an environment that is not harmful to his or
her health or well-being. Section 24 also talks about
sustainable development wherein development
should take into consideration the protection of the
environment. To this end, sustainable mining will
entail the integration of social, economic and
environmental factors in the planning,
implementation and evaluation of decisions to
ensure that development serves present and future
generations.
Sustainable development requires the consideration
of all relevant factors in the course of any business
particularly mining and the mining operators must
ensure that the disturbance of ecosystems and loss
of biological diversity are avoided, or, where they
cannot be altogether avoided, are minimized and
remedied (section 4(a) of NEMA). That pollution
and degradation of the environment are avoided, or,
where they cannot be altogether avoided, are
minimized and remedied; that the disturbance of
landscapes and sites that constitute the nation’s
cultural heritage is avoided, or where it cannot be
altogether avoided, is minimized and remedied.
Adhering to these principles will definitely
promote and produce sustainable mining business.
However if there is transgression of the principles
and the law, the law should be enforced by the
State against erring mining company. It is against
the backdrop of this that the court in the case of
Fuel Retailers Association of Southern Africa v
Director-General: Environmental Management,
Department of Agriculture, Conservation and
Environment, Mpumalanga Province and Others
(CCT67/06) [2007] ZACC 13; 2007 (10) BCLR
1059 (CC); 2007 (6) SA 4 (CC) (7 June 2007)
held that sustainable economic and mining
development are elements that take “on
significance to the extent that they implicate the
environment and that when economic
development such as harmful mining potentially
threatens the environment it becomes relevant to
NEMA and this threat will automatically become
a material ingredient to be put in the scales of a
NEMA evaluation in order to ascertain the extent
of contravention and the necessary sanctions to be
imposed accordingly.

Environmental Economics, Volume 8, Issue 4, 2017
20
4.4. Mineral and Petroleum Resources
Development Act 2002. One of the objectives of
this Act is to give effect to section 24 of the
Constitution by ensuring that the nation’s mineral
and petroleum resources are developed in an orderly
and ecologically sustainable manner while
promoting justifiable social and economic
development. A prospecting right, mining right,
exploration right or production right granted in
terms of this Act is a limited right in respect of the
mineral or petroleum and the land to which such
right relates.
No person may prospect for, mine, conduct
technical co-operation operations, reconnaissance
operations, explore for and produce any mineral or
petroleum or commence with any work incidental
thereto on any area without an approved
environmental management plan, as the case may be
and consulting with the land owner or lawful
occupier of the land in question.
If any prospecting, mining, reconnaissance or
production operations cause or results in ecological
degradation, pollution or environmental damage
which may be harmful to the health or well-being of
anyone and requires urgent remedial measures, the
Minister may direct the holder of the relevant right,
permit or permission to investigate, evaluate, assess
and report on the impact of any pollution or
ecological degradation.
If the holder fails to comply with the directive, the
Minister may take such measures as may be
necessary to protect the health and well-being of any
affected person or to remedy ecological degradation
and to stop pollution of the environment. If the
minister directs that measures contemplated in
section 45 must be taken to prevent pollution or
ecological degradation of the environment or to
rehabilitate dangerous occurrences but establishes
that the holder of the relevant reconnaissance
permission, prospecting right, mining right,
retention permit or mining permit, as the case may
be, or his or her successor in title, is deceased or
cannot be traced or, in the case of a juristic person,
has ceased to exist, has been liquidated or cannot
raced, the Minister may instruct the Regional
Manager concerned to take the necessary measures
to prevent further pollution or degradation, or make
the area safe.
The measures contemplated in subsection (1) must
be funded from the financial provisions made by the
holder of the relevant rights, where necessary
appropriate, or if there is no such provision or if it is
inadequate, from money appropriated by the
Parliament for the purpose. Upon completion of the
measures contemplated in subsection (1), the
Regional Manager must apply to the registrar
concerned that the title deed of the land in question
be endorsed to the effect that such land had been
remedied. The registrar concerned must, on receipt
of the application contemplated in paragraph (a)
make such endorsements as he or she may deem
necessary so as to give effect to provisions of that
paragraph, and no office fee or other charge is
payable to the registrar in respect of such
endorsement.
The MPRDA is the backbone of the mining
legislation as it provides for the negotiation stages,
prospecting stages, closure and rehabilitation and
restoration of the land prior, during and after the
mining activities. This Act gives the Minister the
power to intervene to prevent environmental
degradation and where necessary revoke a mining
right to protect and minimize environmental
degradation.
The Environmental Management Program is a
section 39 requirement of the MPRDA and can be
used to address all the legal requirements (in short
referred to as the section 39 EMPR). Updates with
regards to the legal requirements are addressed
through the annual updates required under
Regulation 55 of the MPRDA. The changes made in
the statute will result in a change of this mechanism.
The statute deals with the responsibilities of holders
of mining rights, permits, or permissions and states
in section 38(1)(e) that such holder, whose mining
causes or results in ecological degradation,
pollution, or environmental damage that may be
harmful to the health or well-being of anyone”, is
responsible for any environmental damage,
pollution or ecological degradation as a result of his
or her operations and which may occur inside and
outside the boundaries of the area to which such
right, permit or permission relates”, and in terms of
section 43(1), “remain responsible for any
environmental liability, pollution or ecological
degradation and the management thereof until a
closure certificate has been issued”. The Minister
only issues the certificate after he is completely
satisfied that the holder of the right has adhered to
the regulations provided in the EMP and the EMPR.
If he is not satisfied then the holder of the right will
be held liable. If this regulation is stringently
enforced, it can reduce any further degradation to
the mining area as the holder will have to restore the
land to its state before the mining activities.
4.5. National Environmental Management:
Biodiversity Act No. 10 of 2004. The Biodiversity
Act is fundamental to the notion of sustainable

Environmental Economics, Volume 8, Issue 4, 2017
21
development. International guidelines and
commitments as well as national policies and
strategies are important in creating a shared vision
for sustainable development in South Africa
(MMSD, 2014).
The function of the South African National
Biodiversity Institute is established by this Act, The
institute may coordinate and implement
programmes for the rehabilitation of ecosystems and
the prevention, control or eradication of listed
invasive species. The institute may also coordinate
programmes to involve civil society in the
conservation and rehabilitation of the ecosystem.
This act protects areas where endangered species
can be found. It protects against environmental
degradation and promotes rehabilitation where
prevention cannot be possible. For example, if there
are minerals on a land where endangered species are
found and cannot be rescued or relocated, then such
mining right for that particular area will not be granted.
Conclusion
The extent of the effects of mining activities on the
communities in South Africa is appalling and as
such efforts must be made to protect the
environment from harmful mining operations that
degrade the communities where they operate. To
this end, the extractive companies should operate
responsibly and sensibly as this will promote
sustainable mining activities. However, if they do
not, there are ample legislation in South Africa that
could be used to make them accountable and
responsible as articulated in this paper. The court
should continue to play its judicial role to protect
the environment by interpreting salient provisions in
the legislation and apply them to sanction erring
mining companies.
References
1. Agius, J. (2009). International Environmental Law and State Sovereignty. Asia Pacific Journal of Environmental, 26.
2. Ajei, M. O. (2007). Africa’s Development: the imperatives of indigenous knowledge and values.
3. Akcil, A., & Koldas, S. (2006). Acid Mine Drainage (AMD): causes, treatment and case studies. Journal of Cleaner
Production, 1139-1145.
4. Allan, R. J. (1995). Impact of mining activities on the terrestrial and aquatic environment with emphasis on mitigation
and remedial measures.
5. Amechi, E. P., Law Env’t, & Dev, J. (2009). Poverty, Socio-Political Factors and Degradation of the Environment in
Sub-Saharan Africa: The Need for a Holistic Approach to the Protection of the Environment and Realisation of the Right
to Environment. Retrieved from
http://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/leadjo5&div=11&id=&page (accessed on June 12,
2016).
6. Ashton, P., Love, D., Mahachi, H., & Dirks, P. (2001). Overiew of the impact of mining and mineral processing
operations on water resources and water quality in the Zambezi, Limpopo and Olifants catchments in Southern Africa
(accessed on August 10, 2017.)
7. Atha-Africa Ventures (Pty) Ltd (A-AV) is a subsidiary of Atha Group, India, and is the flagship Company of the Group
in South Africa. AAV has a registered office in Sandton, Johannesburg, with a dedicated team. Retrieved from
http://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/apjel6&div=3&id=&page (accessed on May 15,
2016).
8. Ayres, T. (2015). Legal Requirements. The Environmental Management Programme (EMP): A Critique.
9. Badenhorst, P. J., Schoeman’s. (2006). The Law of Property (5th ed.).
10. Bell, D. T., & Heddle, E. M. (1989). Floristic, morphologic and vegetational diversity. In The Jarrah Forest: A
Complex Mediterranean Ecosystem (pp. 53-66).
11. Bell, F. G. (2000). Environmental impacts associated with an abandoned mine in the Witbank Coalfield, South Africa.
International Journal of Coal Geology, 195-216.
12. Bell, F. G., Bullock, S. E. T., Halbich, T. F. J., Lindsay, P. (2001). Environmental impacts associated with an abandoned
mine in the Witbank Coalfield, South Africa. International Journal of Coal Geology, 195-216.
13. Bell, F. G., Stacey, T. R., Genske, D. D. (2000). Mining subsidence and its effect on the environment: some differing
examples.
14. Bench Marks Foundation (2014). Policy Gap 9. South African coal mining, August 2014.
15. Bobbin, K. (2015). Acid Mine Drainage and its Governance in the Gauteng City-Region. Occasional Paper for the
GCRO.
16. Bolong, L. D. O., Tul. J. Int’l, & Comp, L. (2016). Into The Abyss: Rationalizing Commercial Deep Seabed Mining
Through Pragmatism and International Law. Retrieved from
http://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/tulicl25&div=8&id=&page (accessed on June 16,
2017).
17. Brennan, K. F. C., Nicholas, O. G., & Majer, J. D. (2005). Innovative techniques for promoting fauna return to
rehabilitated sites following mining.
18. Bridge, G. (2004). Contested terrain: mining and the environment. Retrieved from
http://www.annualreviews.org/doi/abs/10.1146/annurev.energy.28.011503.163434 (accessed on May 17, 2017).

Environmental Economics, Volume 8, Issue 4, 2017
22
19. Cahill, D. M., Rookes, J. E., Wilson, B. A., Gibson, L. (2008). Phytophthoracinnamomi and Australia’s biodiversity:
impacts, predictions and progress towards control.
20. Colquhoun, I. J., & St. Hardy, G. E. (2000). Managing the risks of Phytophthoraroot and collar rot during
bauxite mining in the Eucalyptus marginata (Jarrah) forest of Western Australia. Plant Disease, 84, 116-
127 (accessed on November 16, 2016).
21. Cullen-Unsworth, L. C., Nordlund, L. M., Paddock, J. (2014). Seagrass meadows globally as a coupled social –
ecological system: Implications for human wellbeing, Marine Pollution. Retrieved from
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0025326X13002919 (accessed on June 9, 2016).
22. Cullinan, K. (2015). Health E-News: Mining- the fox is in charge of the hen house. Daily Maverick, 18 October 2015.
23. Danielson, L. (2006). Architecture for change: An account of the mining, minerals and sustainable development project.
Berlin, Global Public Policy Institute. Retrieved from http://www.gppi.net/ (accessed on May 4, 2016).
24. Davies, T. (2014). A desperate battle is raging across vast tracts of Mpumalanga between coal mining on the one hand
and water preservation, food security and tourism on the other, 15 September 2014.
25. Davies, T. (2014). Environmental crisis in Mpumalanga: why is nobody listening? 15 September 2014. Centre for
Environmental Rights.
26. Death, C. (2014). The green economy in South Africa: Global discourses and local politics. Retrieved from
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/02589346.2014.885668 (accessed on August 17, 2016).
27. Dontala, S. P., Reddy, T. B., Vadde, R. (2015) Environmental aspects and impacts its mitigation measures of corporate
coal mining. Retrieved from http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1878522015000533 (accessed on July
17, 2016).
28. Downing, T. E. (2002). Avoiding new poverty: mining-induced displacement and resettlement. Retrieved from
http://pubs.iied.org/pdfs/G00549.pdf (accessed on February 4, 2017).
29. Duri, F. T. P. (2016). Chapter Fifteen Environmental Activism from Below: The Case of the subaltern against
Commercial Diamond-mining Companies in the Chiadzwa Area of Zimbabwe. Retrieved from
https://books.google.co.za/books?hl=en&lr=&id=1fXMDQAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PA415&dquxfTQluojs&sig=8
1NC 6y4iRrZQahY6mT433HufBFc#v=onepage&q&f=false (accessed on May 19 , 2017).
30. Eisler, R. (2003). Health risks of gold miners: a synoptic review-Environmental Geochemistry and Health. Retrieved
from https://link.springer.com/article/10.1023%2FA%3A1024573701073?LI=true (accessed on June 17 , 2016).
31. Ferris, L., & Kotze, L. J. (2014). The Regulations of Acid Mine Drainage in South Africa: Law and Governance
Perspectives. PER/PELJ 2105.
32. Fuggle, R. F., Rabie, M. A. (2009) Environmental Management in South Africa. Retrieved from
https://books.google.co.za/books?hl=en&lr=&id=pyctQBW8fZUC&oi=fnd&pg=PR5&dq=ey6JeaMJ7C&sig=CP
Z3cq kEsCChcEEZaibK9sxqEg#v=onepage&q&f=false (accessed on July 27, 2016).
33. Gao, L., Miao, Z., Bai, Z., Zhou, X., Zhao, J., Zhu, Y. (1998). A case study of ecological restoration at the Xiaoyi
Bauxite Mine, Shanxi Province. China1, 1997. Ecological Engineering.
34. Gao, L., Miao, Z., Bai, Z., Zhou, X., Zhao, X., Zhu, Y. (1995). Reclamation of mining land in China: Policies and
practices In Wang, R. (Ed.)., Wealth, Health and Faith. China Environmental Science (pp. 130-141.)
35. Gardner, J. H., & Bell, D. T. (2007). Bauxite mining restoration by Alcoa World Alumina Australia in Western
Australia: social, political, historical, and environmental contexts.
36. Goswami, S. (2014). Environmental Impact Assessment of Coal Mining: Indian Scenario. Retrieved from
https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=22006298 (accessed on May 17, 2017).
37. Grant, C., & Koch, J. (2007). Decommissioning Western Australia’s First Bauxite Mine: Co-evolving vegetation
restoration techniques and targets.
38. Gupta, V., Lehal, G. S. (2009). A survey of text mining techniques and applications.
39. Hamann, H. (2004). Corporate social responsibility, partnerships, and institutional change: The case of mining
companies in South Africa.
40. Hamann, R. (2003). Mining companies’ role in sustainable development: the’why’and’how’of corporate social
responsibility from a business perspective. Retrieved from
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/03768350302957 (accessed on July 17, 2016).
41. Hamann, R. (2004). Corporate social responsibility, partnerships, and institutional change: The case of mining
companies in South Africa. Retrieved from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1477-
8947.2004.00101.x/full (accessed on July 27, 2017).
42. Haney, M., Shkaratan, M. (2003). Mine Closure and its Impact on the Community.
43. Harmony Gold mining company Ltd v Regional Director: Free State Department of Water Affairs & others 2014(3) SA
149 (SCA).
44. Hassan, P. (2007). Environmental Protection, Rule of Law and the Judicial Crisis in Pakistan, 2007. Asia Pacific Journal
of Environmental Law, 167.
45. Hendry, M., & Ahem, M. (2008). Relations between Health Indicators and Residential Proximity to Coal Mining in
West Virginia.
46. Herbert, T. L. (2000). The Impact of Environmental Protection on the Acquisition, Transfer and Renewal of Mineral
Rights (LLB thesis, University of Cape Town). Retrieved from www.landlawwatch.co.za (accessed on June 15, 2016).
47. Hilson, G., Murck, B. (2000). Sustainable development in the mining industry: clarifying the corporate perspective

Environmental Economics, Volume 8, Issue 4, 2017
23
(accessed on December 19, 2016).
48. Hiskes, R. P. (2012). Environmental Human Rights: Handbook of Human Rights. Retrieved from
https://books.google.co.za/books?hl=en&lr=&id=_zt9AgAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PA399&dq=wNQ162vPU8&sig
=Vh1 udFZprrYcQXpAzwDneBExX-0#v=onepage&q&f=false (accessed on June 23, 2017).
49. Horn, L. (2004). The implications of the concept of common concern of a human kind on a Human Right to a healthy
environment. Macquarie Journal of International and Comparative Environmental Law, 233.
50. Humby, T. (2012). Maccsand: Intergovernmental relations and the doctrine of usurpation, 27(2) SA Public Law
(pp. 628-638).
51. Ibe, E. E. (2015). Perception of Nigerians on the negative impact of electricity generation on the environment in Nigeria.
Retrieved from http://www.environment.co.za/mining-2/effects-of-mining.html (accessed on May 29, 2016).
52. Igoe, L. T. (2014). The opulent city and the Sylvan state: Art and environmental embodiment in early national
Philadelphia.
53. Jeffrey, M. (2005). Environmental ethics and sustainable development: Ethical and Human Rights issues in
implementing indigenous rights. Macquarie Journal of International and Comparative Environmental Law, 105.
54. Johnson, D. B., & Hallberg, K. B. (2005). Acid mine drainage remediation options: review.
55. Johnson, M. S., Putwain, P. D. (1981). Restoration of native biotic communities on land disturbed by metalliferous
mining.
56. Joseph, B. (2005). Environmental studies. Retrieved from
https://books.google.co.za/books?hl=en&lr=&id=tuH8cujFqnIC&oi=fnd&pg=PR15&dq=&ots=LzK4DZFFSd&si
g=H LpwsMcMaFzKfgKoeoA6buwvy-Q#v=onepage&q&f=false (accessed on May 17, 2016).
57. Lalor, B. M. (2008). An assessment of the recovery of the microbial community in Jarrah forest soils after Bauxite
mining and prescription burning.
58. Lewis, B. (2013). Environmental rights or a right to the environment? Exploring the nexus between Human Rights and
Environmental protection. Macquarie Journal of International and Comparative Environmental Law, 97.
59. Li, W. (2004). Degradation and restoration of forest ecosystems in China.
60. Liu, R. (1995). Review of reclamation of waste land in China. Reclamation and Greening of Waste Land of Mine, 1-6.
61. Livesley, K. (2010). Mine rehabilitation in the Australian minerals industry.
62. Livesley, S. (2016). Conserving herbivorous and predatory insects in urban green spaces.
63. Ma, Z. (1995). Research on Reclamation of Surface-Mined Lands in the Loess Plateau (1st ed.). Scientific Press, Beijing,
199.
64. Mahalu, C. R. (1989). Environmental Degradation and The Law in Tanzania. Retrieved from
http://www.jstor.org/stable/43109907 (accessed on 19 December, 2016).
65. Mannion, A. (2014) Global environmental change: a natural and cultural environmental history. Retrieved from
https://books.google.co.za/books?hl=en&lr=&id=k1SPBAAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PP1&dq==fJssm5Gz_u&sig=R2vN
FFyRcBkZzFA_LtI4G3RmXsg (accessed on June 6, 2017).
66. McCarthy, T. S. (2001). The impact of acid mine drainage in South Africa. South African Journal of Science, 712.
67. McDonald, D. A. (2004). Environmental Justice in South Africa. Retrieved from
https://books.google.co.za/books?hl=en&lr=&id=F1WdPPD15pYC&oi=fnd&pg=PR9&dq (accessed on August 17,
2016).
68. Mehta, M. C. (1997). Making the Law Work for the Environment. Asia Pacific Journal of Environmental Law, 349.
69. Miao, Z. W., Gao, L., Zhang, W. (2002). Ecological rebuilding and land reclamation in surface mines in Shanxi
Province, China.
70. MMSD (2014). Such as the Johannesburg Plan of Implementation, agreed at the World Summit on Sustainable
Development in 2002, the Mining, Minerals and Sustainable Development (MMSD) reports and the National Strategy
for Sustainable Development (2011- 2014).
71. Montrie, C. (2001). To save the land and people: a history of opposition to coal surface mining in Appalachia.
72. Motseo, G. (2013). A mountain caves in, Lannex. Steelburger local newspaper September 2013.
73. Neate, G. (2001). Review of conference: emerging issues and future directions.
74. Nkadimeng, M. J. (2016). The Driekop community’s perception of the impact of the Modikwa platinum mine. Retrieved
from http://wiredspace.wits.ac.za/handle/10539/21488 (accessed on January 6, 2017 )
75. Norman, M. A., Koch, J. M., Grant, C. D., Morald, T. K. (2006). Vegetation Succession after Bauxite Mining in
Western Australia.
76. Obama, B., Senator, U. S. (2013). Coal, Natural Gas, Tar Sands: More Greenhouse Gases at Higher Cost, The Coming
Storm.
77. Ololade, O. O., Annegarn, H. J. (2016). Mining conflicts and Corporate Social Responsibility: Titanium mining in
Kwale, Kenya. The Extractive Industries and Society, 3(6), 485-493. Retrieved from
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301420713000767 (accessed on April 29, 2016).
78. Owen, J. R., Kemp, D. (2013). Social licence and mining: A critical perspective.
79. Paczkowska, G., & Chapman, A. R. (2000). The Western Australian Flora. A Descriptive Catalogue.
80. Padmalal, D., Maya K. (2014). Impacts of river sand mining.
81. Pfeiffer, J. W. (1999). Conditions that hinder effective communication.
82. Pinetown, K. L., Ward, C. R., & Van Der Weisthuisen, W. A. (2005). Quantitative evaluation of Mineral in coal deposits

Environmental Economics, Volume 8, Issue 4, 2017
24
in the Witbank and Highveld coalfields, and the potential impact on acid mine drainage.
83. Rai, V. R., Raman, N. S., Choudhary, S. K. (2015). Development of Indian Coal Industry Specific Environment Audit
Format.
84. Ramanujan, K. (2005). Methane’s Impacts on Climate Change May Be Twice Previous Estimates, Goddard Space
Flight Center, July 18, 2005.
85. Robert, E. D. (1992). Prime Farmland Reclamation. In Dept. Agronomy, IL Agric. Experiment Station (p. 184).
University of Illinois Press, Urbana.
86. Schmitz, J. A. (2005). What determines productivity? Lessons from the dramatic recovery of the US and Canadian iron
ore industries following their early 1980s crisis.
87. Schultz, J. (1999). Balancing the Relationship between Trade and the Environment within the World Trade
Organization: Is the End of the Sea Turtle? Asia Pacific Journal of Environmental, 37.
88. Stockholm Declaration (2004). Declaration of the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment (Stockholm)
UN Doc A/CONF/48/14/REV.1 (“Stockholm Declaration”).
89. Stracher, G. B., Taylor, T. P. (2004). Coal fires burning out of control around the world: thermodynamic recipe for
environmental catastrophe. International Journal of Coal Geology. Retrieved from
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0166516204000102 (accessed on February 5, 2016).
90. Tello, R. (2015) Social Safeguards: Avoiding the Unintended Impacts of Development. Retrieved from
https://books.google.co.za/books?hl=en&lr=&id=q1QrDwAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PA7&dq=fE23z6TZNH&sig=L
JCD 7AEmJbHYDbxCU391q64FQXY#v=onepage&q&f=false (accessed on May 15, 2017).
91. Truter, J. (2011). Mining rehabilitation- a regulated activity- natural resources.
92. Truter, J. (2016). South Africa. Mining Rehabilitation-A regulated activity. Werksmans incorporated (accessed on August
15, 2017).
93. Van Rensburg, L. J., Naudé, W. (2007). Human rights and development: The case of local government transformation in
South Africa. Retrieved from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/pad.449/full (accessed on May 17, 2016).
94. Walde, T. (2002). Mining law reform in South Africa. Minerals & Energy, 17(10).
95. Warner, K., Hamza, M., Oliver-Smith, A., Renaud, R., Julca, A. (2010). Climate change, environmental degradation and
migration. Retrieved from https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11069-009-9419-7
96. White, R. (2013). Resource extraction leaves something behind: Environmental justice and mining. International
Journal for Crime, Justice and Social. Retrieved from https://www.crimejusticejournal.com/article/view/90 (accessed
December 22, 2016).
97. Witze, A., Kanipe, J. (2015). Island on fire: the extraordinary story of a forgotten volcano that changed the world.
98. Wolfgang, F. (2003). Water control and mining grouting a South African historical perspective.
99. Yang, X., Zhang, K., Jia, L., Ci, L. (2002). Desertification assessment in China: An overview.
100. Yu, M. H., Tsunoda, H., Tsunoda, M. (2011). Environmental toxicology: biological and health effects of pollutants.
Retrieved from https://books.google.co.za/books?hl=en&lr=&id=zMCiWZiuTJsC&oi=fnd&pg=PP1&dq=
PFn1YX0W0FZo1dSRtvvNPdc#v=onepage&q&f=false (accessed on December 17, 2016).