How do the people who live near a mine define reclamation success?
How can local expectations be better incorporated into reclamation planning and practice?
Discussion Paper: the meanings of reclamation “success” in the Yukon
TLDR: Yukoners think about quartz mine reclamation as returning the land to "as close as possible" to what it was before. This denies the reality that quartz mining is transformational and the land will be very different afterwards. I recommend shifting our thinking to planning for change: how will the land be different after mining and is this new state going to benefit future generations?
Download the Discussion Paper
Maybe you prefer to watch a video rather than read? Here’s a 20 minute presentation that covers the key findings and discussion points.
Academic version of the Discussion Paper:
Isbister K, Piper L, Landhäusser SM. 2025. Perceptions of reclamation success as “as close as possible to the pre-mining state” undermine public participation and Indigenous consent in mineral governance. Facets 10: 1-13.
This paper is publicly available here
In other research news:
I was grateful for the opportunity to present on some ongoing history research with my good friend and colleague Caitlynn Beckett in collaboration with CPAWS Yukon.
It turns out that regulating reclamation in the Yukon is not a new thing and has consistently failed to produce acceptable reclamation outcomes over the last 50 years. Most of the mechanisms proposed for the new mineral legislation have already been tried and are unlikely to produce different results. There’s a great opportunity to learn from reclamation’s past to identify where the current legislation is insufficient and consider how new legislation could directly address these issues.