Enhancing regulatory compliance with mine rehabilitation and closure requirements: a comparative study of the international, Chinese, and Australian legal and policy frameworks

Despite the increasing focus on progressive rehabilitation, successful mine closures and post-closure economic transition remain limited in both China and Australia. Both countries face significant legal and regulatory barriers when it comes to bringing mines up to a safe and stable standard. These include inconsistent legal application of some critical concepts, such as ‘rehabilitation’ and ‘restoration’, as well as insufficient or ineffective legal regulatory requirements that fall short of international best practices. Such challenges could pose a risk to discerning and demonstrating compliance with mine rehabilitation and closure conditions. International soft law could provide valuable guidance to address these regulatory gaps. This research critically examines the extent to which international soft law can provide relevant guidance on mine rehabilitation and closure to enhance regulatory compliance in China and Australia. It utilises desktop legal study, case analysis, and comparative legal analysis to identify notable problems and leading practices across these legal frameworks. First, the research sets the scene by defining a consistent use of the most relevant terminology and the goals of mine rehabilitation and closure, with a focus on the 2019 Society for Ecological Restoration (SER) International Standard and the 2022 SER Mine Site Restoration Standards. Second, it examines the most relevant laws, policies, and guidelines on mine rehabilitation and closure in China and Australia, with a particular focus on Western Australia. Then, it compares the key legal elements of the international, Chinese, and Australian legal and policy frameworks, including the definitions, scope of application, substantive principles, procedural requirements, institutions, and financial liability mechanisms. This analysis also incorporates practical examples to assess the regulatory approaches to post-closure economic transition in both countries. Finally, based on a previous study, this aims to provide actionable recommendations for aligning Chinese and Australian regulatory frameworks with international best practices, with the goal of enhancing regulatory compliance and supporting more effective ecosystem restoration outcomes.