36
Geotechnical News • December 2017
GEO-INTEREST
people or the general public.
Never lose sight of the full
mine project life cycle and
use a time horizon for design
that spans the full life cycle,
even if it means butting heads
with your client.
Action 2.Use language with integrity.
Be aware that a safety factor
of 2 (which sounds great to
the public) translates to a fail-
ure rate of 1 failure per 1000
years for leachate collection
systems. This means that a
tailings impoundment engi-
neered with an overall factor
of safety of 2, will on average
fail once in a thousand years
– or that one in a thousand
tailings impoundments will
fail every year. It also means
that the facility is designed to
eventually fail. Saying this is
not pessimistic – it is honest
and realistic and it is some-
thing that the public need to
understand if they are to sup-
port good decision-making
(see Freeze, 2000 for a clear
discussion of this topic).
Action 3. Integrate citizen values into
technical decision-making.
There are some geotechni-
cal engineers who believe
their role is to deal with risk
by “assuring people that we
can deal with it, not rais-
ing their concerns.” People
see through this approach.
Rather, in today’s world there
needs to be a shift from the
above perspective to one
where risks are acknowl-
edged along with the inability
of responsible parties and
the technical community to
eliminate those risks. We
need to share that reality
with the public and build
approaches which effectively
combine the facts, judgments,
and probabilities provided
by technical experts with
value judgments provided by
stakeholders. Doing so is not
an admission of weakness,
but of strength.
Action 4.Let ethics trump poor com-
pany behaviour. Ask yourself
what is right – and do it. It’s
always worth it.
Action 5.Work to the high ground . .
. it’s almost always found in
the middle. In working with
different cultures – within a
company, in a community,
in a country, no one party
is always right, and almost
always each party has insight
to offer. The best way for-
ward is almost always one
that combines good from
each, an anathema to those
who would proclaim “it’s
either my way or the high-
way.”
References
Freeze, R. Allan, 2000. The Envi-
ronmental Pendulum. Oakland:
University of California Press.
Gadsby, John (2000), Personal com-
munications. Vancouver BC.
Hodge, R.A. (2011). ‘Mining and
Sustainability’. In P. Darling (ed.),
SME Mining Engineering Hand-
book, 3rd edition. Englewood, CO:
Society for Mining Metallurgy and
Exploration Inc.
ICMM (2012). Mining’s Contribution
to Sustainable Development: An
Overview. London: International
Council on Mining and Metals.
Available at:
(accessed 15 June
2016).
MacDonald, Alistair, 2002. Industry
in transition: a profile of the North
American Mining Sector. Mining
Minerals and Sustainable Develop-
ment North America. Winnipeg:
International Institute for Sustain-
able Development.
NRTEE, 1993. Toward Reporting
Progress on Sustainable Develop-
ment in Canada - Report to the
Prime Minister. Ottawa: National
Round Table on the Environment
and the Economy.
Thomson, I., and S. Joyce (2006).
‘Changing Mineral Exploration
Industry Approaches to Sustain-
ability’. Society of Economic
Geologists, 12, special volume.
UNEP (2017). Mine waste storage:
safety is no accident – a rapid
response assessment. Nairobi:
United Nations Environment
Programme. Available at
Accessed 30 Oct 2017.
R. Anthony Hodge, P.Eng. Ph.D.
Senior-scholar-in-residence
Kingston, Ontario
613 532 1278
