choice experiment technique assessment on valuation of sustainable mining social impacts

Document Type : research - paper

Authors

1 PhD Student of Mining Engineering at Amirkabir University of Technology, Tehran, Iran, narrei@aut.ac.ir

2 Amirkabir University of Technology

Abstract

Job creation is one of the important social impacts of mining, which is considered in many aspects. The number of new jobs created, the duration of employment, the acquisition of skills for employment in other mines and the duration of work in inappropriate conditions (sometimes underground mines) can be attributed to the job creation opportunities created by mining in the region. In addition to the above mentioned, mining has positive social impacts such as creating welfare facilities and improving the livelihoods of the people of the region and negative impacts, such as the creation of social anomalies and the collapse of gender balance. So far, much research has been done on the economic and environmental impacts of mining, and the third criterion of sustainable development, which is a community, has been neglected. In this paper, the "choice experiment" method, a new method of "stated preferences" approach, has been used to estimate the value of social impacts of mining. In this study, the social impacts of mining on two parts of employment and other social impacts of mining have been investigated. For this purpose, a questionnaire was prepared and the results of 780 responses for each section after encoding were entered into the STATA software and its appropriate pattern and respondents preferences according to the coefficients and pattern results. Based on the results of estimating conditional logit in both section, Lagrange's ratio is statistically significant which shows a significant regression for the model. Also, according to the results of this research, it can be said that for respondents, the number of jobs and desirability of the livelihood is the highest value and they are ready to work longer in inappropriate conditions, provided that these conditions do not lead to social anomalies in their place of residence.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

منابع
1. L. Mancini and S. Sala, "Social impact assessment in the mining sector: Review and comparison of indicators frameworks," Resources Policy, pp. 98-111, 2018.
2 . عیسیزاده، سعید. جلیلی کامجو، سید پرویز. مددی،
» مهندسی معدن « ارزیابی روش آزمون انتخاب در ارزشگذاری تاثیرات اجتماعی معدنکاری پایدار نشریه علمی پژوهشی
33
سعید. محمودینیا، داوود. ) 1391 (. ارزشگذاری کالاهای
غیربازاری مبتنی بر رویکرد ترجیحات بیان شده. اقتصاد
منابع طبیعی، 21 - 36.
3. Hensher, D. A., Rose, J. M., & Greene, W. H. (2005). “Applied choice analysis: a primer”. Cambridge University Press.
4. G. J. R. S. L. a. V. T. Ivanova, "Assessing social and economic impacts associated with changes in the coal mining industry in the Bowen Basin, Queensland, Australia," Management of Environmental Quality, vol. 18, no. 2, pp. 211-228, 2007.
5. G. Ivanova and J. Rolfe, "Assessing development options in mining communities using stated preference techniques," Resources Policy, vol. 36, no. 3, pp. 255-264, 2011.
6. R. Gillespie and M. E. Krat, "Valuing the non-market impacts of underground coal mining," The University of western Australia, Perth, 2010.
7. J. Windle and J. Rolfe, "Using discrete choice experiments to assess the preferences of new mining workforce to commute or relocate to the Surat Basin in Australia," Resources Policy, vol. 38, no. 2 , pp. 169-180, 2013.
8. J. Windle and J. Rolfe, "Assessing the trade-offs of increased mining activity in the S urat B asin, Q ueensland: preferences of B risbane residents using nonmarket valuation
techniques," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, vol. 58, no. 1, pp. 111-129, 2014.
9. S. Que, K. Awuah-Offei and V. A. Samaranayake, "Classifying critical factors that influence community acceptance of mining projects for discrete choice experiments in the United States," cleaner production, vol. 87 , pp. 489-500, 2015.
10. M. K. Boateng, "Modeling dynamic community acceptance of mining using agent-based modeling," Missouri University of Science and Technology, Missouri, 2017.
11. R. A. Schwartz, J. A. Byrne and E. Stempel, Market Integrity, Springer International Publishing, 2018.
12. F. Aleskerov, D. Bouyssou and B. Monjardet, Utility maximization, choice and preference, Springer Science & Business Media, 2007.
13. C. F. Manski, "The structure of random utility models," Theory and decision, vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 229-254, 1977.
14. D. McFadden, Conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice behavior, New York: Academic Press, 1973.
15. J. J. Louviere, D. A. Hensher and J. D. Swait, Stated choice methods: analysis and applications, Cambridge: Cambridge university press, 2000.
Journal of Mining Engineering
Volume 14, Issue 43
November 2019
Pages 33-23

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 05 October 2018
  • Revise Date: 28 January 2019
  • Accept Date: 01 July 2019

Share

How to cite

Statistics