Dennis Alonzo, School of Education, University of New South Wales, Sydney (d.alonzo@unsw.edu.au)
Marlon Suelto, University of the Philippines, Los Baños, Laguna
Introduction
Developing clear principles and a practical checklist for working with Indigenous Peoples (IPs) in mine rehabilitation is essential because past and current approaches often excluded IPs’ voices, overlooked their rights, and undervalued their knowledge systems, leading to conflict, mistrust, and ineffective or unsustainable outcomes. Evidence shows that when Indigenous communities are not meaningfully involved in decision-making, rehabilitation efforts fail to address cultural values, local priorities, and long-term social impacts, undermining both environmental success and social license to operate. At the same time, Indigenous knowledge offers deep, context-based insights into ecosystems, land stewardship, and restoration that can significantly improve rehabilitation outcomes when properly integrated. However, translating these insights into practice remains a challenge for practitioners who often lack clear, actionable guidance. Establishing a set of principles provides a normative foundation grounded in rights, equity, and respect, while a checklist operationalises these principles into concrete steps, ensuring consistency, accountability, and practical application across diverse contexts. Together, they help shift rehabilitation from a compliance-driven exercise to a collaborative, culturally informed, and socially just process that delivers more sustainable and accepted outcomes.
We developed guiding principles from our two literature review papers examining community engagement in legacy mine rehabilitation (Alonzo et al., 2024) and the integration of Indigenous knowledge and skills across the mining life cycle (Alonzo et al., 2025). Our reviews show that conventional top-down approaches to mine rehabilitation often fail due to the exclusion of Indigenous Peoples from decision-making and the neglect of their knowledge systems. In contrast, approaches grounded in rights recognition, meaningful participation, knowledge integration, and long-term partnerships result in more sustainable and socially acceptable outcomes.
The principles below synthesise these findings into ten core foundations, each directly linked to a practical checklist for implementation.
Guiding Principles and Checklists for Practitioners
1. Rights-Based and Self-Determination Principle
Recognise Indigenous Peoples as rights-holders with authority over their lands, ensuring Free, Prior, and Informed Consent (FPIC) and meaningful participation in governance.
☐ Are Indigenous Peoples recognised as rights-holders?
☐ Has FPIC been obtained and maintained?
☐ Are Indigenous representatives included in the project’s governance structures?
2. Early and Continuous Engagement Principle
Engagement must begin early (in the planning stage) and continue throughout the mine life cycle, not only during closure or rehabilitation.
☐ Were Indigenous communities engaged from the earliest planning stages?
☐ Is engagement ongoing across all project phases?
☐ Are feedback loops in place to sustain engagement?
3. Meaningful Participation and Co-Governance Principle
Move beyond consultation toward co-design, partnership, shared decision-making, and leadership transfer, ensuring communities influence outcomes.
☐ Does engagement involve co-design or shared decision-making?
☐ Do communities have real influence over activities and outcomes?
☐ Are diverse community voices (e.g., women, men, youth, farmers, teachers) included?
4. Knowledge Co-Production Principle
Treat Indigenous knowledge systems as equally important to scientific knowledge, integrating them into planning, implementation, and evaluation.
☐ Are Indigenous knowledge and practices formally integrated into rehabilitation plans?
☐ Is Indigenous knowledge treated as equally important to scientific knowledge?
☐ Are local land management practices incorporated?
5. Cultural Integrity and “Care for Country” Principle
Respect Indigenous worldviews and ensure rehabilitation enhances cultural, spiritual, and ecological relationships to land.
☐ Are cultural and spiritual values embedded in rehabilitation goals?
☐ Are culturally significant sites protected?
☐ Does the project restore connections to land (“care for country”)?
6. Trust, Transparency, and Accountability Principle
Build long-term trust through transparent processes, clear communication, and accountability, especially in contexts of historical mistrust.
☐ Are processes transparent and clearly communicated?
☐ Are commitments documented and honoured?
☐ Are mechanisms in place to address grievances?
7. Empowerment and Capacity-Building Principle
Support Indigenous communities to develop the capability, agency, and leadership to design, implement, and manage rehabilitation activities through skills development, knowledge transfer, and institutional strengthening.
☐ Are training and capacity-building initiatives in place?
☐ Are communities empowered to design, enact, and lead rehabilitation activities?
☐ Are local governance structures or leadership roles strengthened and supported?
8. Equity and Social Justice Principle
Address power imbalances and structural inequities, ensuring inclusive participation and fair, transparent distribution of benefits.
☐ Are power imbalances explicitly identified and addressed?
☐ Are marginalised groups (e.g., women, youth, sub-groups) meaningfully included?
☐ Are benefit-sharing arrangements fair, transparent, and culturally appropriate?
9. Participatory Monitoring and Adaptive Management Principle
Engage Indigenous communities in monitoring, evaluation, and adaptive management, using both Indigenous and scientific indicators.
☐ Are Indigenous communities involved in monitoring and evaluation?
☐ Are both Indigenous and scientific indicators used?
☐ Is there a process to adapt based on community feedback?
10. Context-Specific and Flexible Practice Principle
Adopt locally tailored and flexible approaches that reflect cultural, ecological, and governance contexts.
☐ Are approaches tailored to local cultural and ecological contexts?
☐ Is flexibility built into project design and implementation?
☐ Are local leadership and institutions actively engaged?
We apply these principles and checklists in our Bio+mine project that aims to develop a site-specific system underpinned by the local community’s knowledge and practices for rehabilitating legacy mines. Full details of the project methodology are described in Alonzo et al. (2023; 2024), Alonzo & Suelto (2023), Andalan et al. (2024), Armstrong et al. (2023), Balboa et al. (2025), Herrington et al. (2023), and Pocaan et al. (2025).
Conclusion
The alignment between these ten principles and the checklist ensures both conceptual clarity and practical usability. Grounded in our two literature reviews, this framework emphasises that effective legacy mine rehabilitation requires rights-based, knowledge-inclusive, and relationship-driven approaches. By consistently applying these principles, practitioners can move beyond compliance-driven models toward rehabilitation practices that are environmentally sustainable, culturally meaningful, and socially just.
References
Alonzo, D., Abril, J. M. V., Villonez, G., Armstrong, R., Dalona, I. M., Beltran, A., Orbecido, A., Tabelin, C. B., Villacorte-Tabelin, M., Promentilla, M. A., Suelto, M., Brito-Parada, P. R., Plancherel, Y., Jungblut, A. D., Santos, A., Schofield, P. F., Resabal, V. J., & Herrington, R. (2025). Integrating indigenous knowledge and skills in mining operations: A systematic literature review. The Extractive Industries and Society, 24, 101706. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.exis.2025.101706
Alonzo, D., Tabelin, C. B., Dalona, I. M., Abril, J. M. V., Beltran, A., Orbecido, A., Villacorte-Tabelin, M., Resabal, V. J., Promentilla, M. A., Suelto, M., Brito-Parada, P. R., Plancherel, Y., Jungblut, A. D., Armstrong, R., Santos, A., Schofield, P. F., & Herrington, R. (2024). Working with the community for the rehabilitation of legacy mines: Approaches and lessons learned from the literature. Resources Policy, 98, 105351. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2024.105351
Alonzo D; Tabelin CB; Dalona IM; Beltran A; Orbecido A; Villacorte-Tabelin M; Resabal VJ; Promentilla MA; Brito-Parada P; Plancherel Y; Jungblut AD; Armstrong R; Santos A; Schofield PF; Herrington R, 2023, ‘Bio+Mine Project: Empowering the Community to Develop a Site-Specific System for the Rehabilitation of a Legacy Mine’, International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 22, http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/16094069231176340, ROS ID: 2034309
Andalan JR; Mondejar AJS; Sumaya NHN; Guihawan JQ; Madamba MRSB; Baltazar Tabelin C; Guilingen D; Paglinawan FC; Maulas KM; Arquisal I; Beltran AB; Orbecido AH; Promentilla MA; Alonzo D; Pisda PF; Ananayo A; Suelto M; Dalona IM; Resabal VJ; Armstrong R; Jungblut AD; Santos A; Brito-Parada P; Plancherel Y; Herrington R; Villacorte-Tabelin M, 2024, ‘Ethnobotanical survey of medicinal and ritual plants utilized by the indigenous communities of Benguet province, Philippines’, Tropical Medicine and Health, 52, http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s41182-024-00624-1
Armstrong RN; Alonzo D; Dalona IM; Villacorte-Tabelin M; Tabelin CB; Beltran A; Orbecido A; Brito-Parada PR; Plancherel Y; Santos A; Herrington R; Jungblut AD; Schofield PF; Promentilla MA; Resabal VJ; Pisda PF; Ananayo A; Lawangen A; Suelto M, 2023, ‘Development of a site-specific system for the rehabilitation of legacy mines: The challenges of social, geological, hydrological, and biological data integration’, in Proceedings of the International Conference on Mine Closure, http://dx.doi.org/10.36487/ACG_repo/2315_012
Alonzo D; Suelto M, 2023, Social Mapping for Environmental Studies: The Key Socio-economic Parameters, https://bioplusmine.earth/?p=1764
Balboa CJP; Pocaan JP; Baute R; Orbecido A; Beltran AB; Santos AL; Jungblut A; Plancherel Y; Brito-Parada P; Tabelin CB; Resabal VJ; Villacorte-Tabelin M; Dalona-Fernandez IM; Alonzo D; Herrington R; Armstrong R; Schofield PF; Dybowska A; Magliulo M; Baniasadi M; Promentilla MAB, 2025, ‘A novel water pollution index for domestic water quality assessment in acid mine drainage-impacted mining areas’, Minerals Engineering, 234, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.mineng.2025.109730
Herrington RJ; Alonzo D; Armstrong RN; Balboa CJ; Baniasadi M; Beltran A; Brito-Parada PR; Cording HM; Creedy T; Dalona IM; Dybowska A; Graham A; Guihawan J; Jungblut AD; Madamba RS; Magliulo M; Maulas K; Mondejar AJ; Orbecido A; Paglinawan F; Plancherel Y; Prasow-Emond M; Promentilla MA; Rasheed S; Resabal VJ; Salatino S; Santos A; Schofield PF; Suelto M; Sumaya NH; Tabelin CB; Villacorte-Tabelin M, 2023, ‘Development of a site-specific system for the rehabilitation of a former copper mine, Sto. Niño, Philippines’, in Proceedings of the International Conference on Mine Closure, http://dx.doi.org/10.36487/ACG_repo/2315_091
Pocaan JP; Bueno BG; Pagaduan JM; Capingian J; Pablo MAN; Paulo JLRW; Beltran AB; Orbecido AH; Tanhueco RM; Tabelin CB; Villacorte-Tabelin M; Resabal VJT; Dalona IM; Alonzo D; Brito-Parada P; Plancherel Y; Armstrong R; Jungblut AD; Santos A; Schofield PF; Herrington R; Promentilla MAB, 2025, ‘Limestone-Based Hybrid Passive Treatment for Copper-Rich Acid Mine Drainage: From Laboratory to Field’, Minerals, 15, http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/min15101043
