V.NĚMEC, L.NĚMCOVÁ

Czech Republic

 

 

Problems of the geoethical audit

 

     In the course of last years besides the originally developed „classical“ audit new kinds of audits have been complemented with more or less urgently needed social and ecological features (social audit, environmental audit). The recent development of geoethics has reached such a level that it is time to start with developing also a specific "geoethical audit" emphasizing an appropriate way of long-term using of non-renewable resources. This development should concern primarily all enterprises dealing with the exploration and exploitation of mineral raw materials. As to the other enterprises dealing with the following treatment of these materials, it is quite possible that the aspects needed from the geoethical point of view can be covered by the already existing Audit EMS (Environmental Management System).

 

     Because we have to respect any natural mineral raw material as part of nonrenewable mineral resources a correct strategy of the complete exploitation of any deposit should respect:

1) the maximum of reasonable use of all raw materials in the deposit (including accompanying materials in the overburden etc.),

2) purposeful delimitation of annual exploitation plans (total quantity of annual exploitation should be optimized in order not to bring any harm to the environment of the deposit and its adjacent region whereas the average quality of the annual exploitation usually should correspond to the long-term needs of the industry responsible for further treatment of exploited resources),

3) minimization of exploitation risks, etc.

All above-mentioned aspects can be evaluated by appropriate space and time models of individual deposits (as developed for a long period - 1967-1995 - by the author with his associate colleagues).

 

To realize any geoethical audit it is necessary at first to develop well in advance a general exploitation strategy for the complete use of the deposit. Following steps are to be ensured for this purpose:

a) the complete evaluation of disposable resources,

b) finding the optimal scenario (time model) how to exploit the whole deposit in shorter periods segments with the special regard to non-renewability of mineral resources and sustainability principles, and besides that

c) the mining activities should respect any current standards of business ethics and of the environmental ethics,

d) the problems of exporting the exploited mineral resources should be solved with the full respect to the long-term strategy for the optimal and sustainable use of these resources. Short-term advantages are to be excluded or – in some emergency cases (as danger of a temporary unemployment, necessity of revitalization o the local district etc.) - they are to be at least minimized in any decision making. Shifting of serious geoethical problems to other countries in the benefit of the local population should be eliminated as well.

 

     The essential conclusion of the geoethical audit should consist in the estimation:

1) how the deposit management is adjusted to strategic plans and goals of the exploitation and of the complex and complete use of the deposit,

2) how economic is the way of exploitation and treatment of the raw materials, and especially   

3) how the exploitation process coincides with the ideas of sustainability; geoethical audit has to take into consideration the responsibility to future generations that will also need appropriate mineral resources.

 

     From the geoethical point of view not only managers of mining enterprises but also all respective state and communal authorities as well as the population are to be convinced that everything has been done to bring the mining process either to the complete exploitation of the whole deposit or at least (in case of a temporary stop) to such an exploitation where any longer discontinuity of mining activities will not cause any irreversible impossibility to continue with the mining activities in the future.

     Special attention should be paid in advance to social problems occurring in connection with closing mining activities as well as to problems of revitalization of the exploited space.

 

     In order to develop quickly and effectively the geoethical audit on an appropriate level some experiences got in the course of developing and establishing the environmental audit can be applied. The Environmental Management Audit Scheme (EMAS) was approved and recommended by the European Community as the instruction Nr. 1836/93. The respective standards recommend how to proceed when introducing the Environmental Management System (EMS) into practical applications (ISO 14004) and how to verify and audit the applied system with a needed certification (ISO 14001). It seems that an analogous Geoethical Management Audit Scheme can be elaborated and introduced into practice as well as other useful environmental phenomena (i.e. environmental aspects, impacts, performances, objectives, programs, etc.) can be complemented by the respective geoethical phenomena (i.e. geoethical aspects, impacts, performances, objectives, programs, etc.).

 

     Also for the existing environmental estimation of the so-called life cycle of the product (Life Cycle Assessment - LCA) it is possible to introduce for deposits of mineral resources the parallel Geoethical Life Cycle Assessment for Deposits (GLCAD).

 

     When the environmentally oriented enterprises are authorized to use the so-called eco-labelling, then the enterprises really acting in the sense of general geoethical aims could be officially authorized as "geoethically oriented enterprises".

 

     Geoethical auditing can be realized as an internal or external audit. When it appears necessary the appropriate experienced individuals can be authorized as responsible for monitoring and controlling activities in individual enterprises. This of course will not deprive the management from its own general responsibility for geoethical decision-making.

 

     Any geoethical audit will need competent experts and respective organizations. A system of their approval and accreditation should be developed and legally established (including the specific register of persons and bodies that will be authorized to realize respective auditing activities).

 

 

Conclusion

 

It would be tasks for a larger international group of experts to make final proposals and suggestions how to develop and activate a needed complete system of geoethical audit. The authors of this contribution will be happy if all the above mentioned ideas will be taken just as an original impulse to the further progress of geoethics.