From Tailings to Trust: Redefining Accountability in Modern Mining
Ali Siamaki
In the aftermath of multiple tailings dam failures and rising public scrutiny, the mining industry stands at a crossroads. The conversation has shifted from engineering excellence alone to a broader question of trust. Communities, investors, and regulators no longer judge a mining operation solely by its output, but by the integrity of its processes, the competence of its people, and its commitment to transparency.
This white paper argues that the foundation of trust in modern mining lies in education, transparency, and professional competence. These three elements are not peripheral to engineering—they are core enablers of safe, responsible, and socially accepted operations.
To sustain a social license to operate, the mining sector must move beyond compliance and toward continuous capability building—ensuring that everyone involved in tailings design, monitoring, and management possesses both the technical skills and the ethical awareness to act as stewards of the environment and community welfare.
The Changing Context of Accountability
1- The Legacy of Catastrophe
Tailings storage facilities (TSFs) are among the most visible symbols of mining’s environmental footprint—and its potential for harm. Disasters such as Mount Polley (2014), Samarco (2015), and Brumadinho (2019) have revealed a recurring truth: catastrophic failure is rarely the result of a single technical error. More often, it reflects systemic breakdowns in communication, governance, and human judgment.
Investigations into these events consistently identify three converging causes:
Inadequate understanding of geotechnical behavior—especially under changing hydraulic and seismic conditions.
Weak corporate governance—where economic pressures override safety culture.
Insufficient professional accountability—in which individuals lacked the authority, or confidence, to question flawed assumptions.
The cost of these failures extends beyond financial loss and environmental devastation. They erode the social fabric between mining companies and the communities that host them. Once trust is lost, it cannot be rebuilt through public relations—it must be earned through demonstrable competence and transparency.
2- The Evolution of Social License
“Social License to Operate” (SLO) has become more than a public affairs term—it is a determinant of project viability. Today, investors and lenders scrutinize environmental, social, and governance (ESG) performance as closely as mineral reserves. Communities expect participation, not notification. Regulators are enforcing higher reporting standards under the Global Industry Standard on Tailings Management (GISTM) and similar frameworks.
At the heart of this transformation is accountability: not merely proving compliance, but demonstrating capability. Stakeholders are asking:
Who designed this facility?
How were they trained?
How is performance verified and communicated?
This shift represents a profound cultural change. It moves accountability from the corporate boardroom to every level of technical execution—placing new emphasis on education, transparency, and professional development.
The Human Factor in Tailings Management
1- Competence as the First Line of Defense
Tailings management is a multi-disciplinary endeavor requiring integration of geotechnical, hydrological, environmental, and operational expertise. Yet, despite technological advancement, human competence remains the most critical control barrier against failure.
Competence, however, cannot be assumed, it must be cultivated. Research from the International Council on Mining and Metals (ICMM) emphasizes that training gaps are among the most consistent weaknesses identified in independent audits. Many TSF incidents originate not from poor technology, but from inadequate understanding of how systems interact under stress.
In other words, education is risk management. A workforce trained to interpret data, understand design assumptions, and challenge deviations provides the most robust safeguard against both technical and ethical lapses.
2- The Education Gap
Traditional mining education remains heavily weighted toward extraction, resource modeling, and mineral economics. Tailings engineering, by contrast, often occupies limited space in undergraduate curricula. The consequence is a professional gap: engineers entering the workforce may possess strong analytical foundations but limited exposure to the complexity of tailings systems.
Equally critical are the non-technical dimensions of competence. Effective tailings management requires understanding of:
Risk communication—translating technical findings into language accessible to communities and regulators.
Ethical decision-making—balancing production pressures against long-term safety.
Systems thinking—seeing tailings not as waste, but as dynamic, evolving structures interacting with hydrology and climate.
Bridging this gap demands a commitment to lifelong learning—where continuous professional education is embedded into operational culture rather than treated as an external requirement.
3- Transparency as the Catalyst of Trust
Transparency transforms technical integrity into social confidence. When communities, regulators, and investors have access to credible, timely, and comprehensible information, they can participate in oversight rather than opposition.
Digital monitoring technologies—such as remote sensing (InSAR, LiDAR), automated piezometers, and satellite-based change detection- now make real-time transparency possible. However, technology alone does not create trust. Trust arises when professionals are competent to interpret data, explain risks honestly, and communicate uncertainties without defensiveness.
True transparency involves not just showing data, but sharing understanding—a cultural shift that begins with education and leadership example.
Education as the Foundation of Responsible Mining
1- Building Capability, Not Just Compliance
In many organizations, training has traditionally been driven by regulatory compliance. Courses are taken, certificates issued, and checkboxes filled. Yet compliance learning rarely translates into competence.
A more effective model treats education as a strategic investment—one that strengthens both human and organizational resilience. This requires training that goes beyond “what the regulations say” to explore why they exist and how to implement them in practice.
An engineer trained to understand the behavioral mechanisms of tailings material under changing saturation is better prepared to anticipate risk than one who simply knows the reporting frequency of an audit.
Similarly, an operator who understands the rationale behind safety procedures is more likely to follow them consistently, even under production pressure.
2- Three Dimensions of Tailings Education
An integrated educational framework for responsible tailings management must operate across three dimensions:
Technical Mastery
Understanding soil-structure interaction, drainage, seepage, consolidation, and failure modes.
Use of digital modeling, instrumentation interpretation, and data analytics.Managerial Literacy
Competence in governance, risk communication, cost-benefit trade-offs, and ESG alignment.
The ability to translate technical data into strategic decision-making.Ethical Awareness
Internalizing accountability to communities and ecosystems, not just shareholders.
Understanding how professional integrity translates into social legitimacy.
These three dimensions form the backbone of a modern competency framework—one that unites engineers, operators, and executives under a shared purpose: to prevent harm through knowledge.
3- Case Study: Learning from Failure
When the Fundão tailings dam failed in Brazil, the investigation identified over 20 technical and organizational factors. Yet one finding stood out: critical monitoring data were available but not acted upon.
This points not to an absence of technology, but an absence of interpretation.
The instruments spoke, but no one listened.
This failure of learning in action underscores the essential link between education and accountability. Data without understanding is noise; only through education does it become wisdom.
4. Transparency and the New Metrics of Trust
1- From Secrecy to Shared Knowledge
Mining once operated under a paradigm of minimal disclosure, justified by competitiveness and security. That model no longer holds. Global investors now expect Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) transparency equivalent to financial reporting.
Frameworks such as the GISTM, the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI), and the Responsible Mining Assurance (IRMA) require disclosure of tailings governance, monitoring results, and emergency preparedness.
The message is clear: transparency is not a liability, it is a prerequisite for trust.
However, disclosure without context can backfire. Publishing complex data without interpretation may increase confusion or fear. Thus, data literacy among professionals becomes a social responsibility, ensuring that information released to the public is both accurate and meaningful.
2- The Role of Digital Tools
Modern technology offers unprecedented opportunities for open accountability.
Remote sensing provides continuous detection of slope or surface changes.
Cloud-based dashboards enable real-time monitoring accessible to regulators and executives alike.
Machine learning models predict trends in pore pressure or deformation before they become critical.
But these tools only strengthen trust when they are paired with transparent governance. A dashboard is not transparency unless the community understands what it shows and why it matters. Engineers trained to interpret and communicate data effectively act as translators between science and society.
3- Reporting as Dialogue
Effective transparency reframes reporting from a compliance task to an act of dialogue. When mining professionals proactively share insights, near-misses, and lessons learned, they create a culture of collective improvement.
This is where education again intersects with trust. Professionals confident in their competence are less likely to hide mistakes and more likely to engage in open learning. Transparency is therefore not just an institutional policy, it is a behavioral outcome of empowered, educated people.
5. Competence, Culture, and the Future of Social License
1- From “Permission” to “Partnership”
Social license to operate can no longer be secured by consultation alone. Communities increasingly demand participation in environmental stewardship and decision-making. Engineers who can communicate risks and collaborate on mitigation strategies become ambassadors of trust.
In this context, competence is diplomacy. When communities believe that engineers understand both the technical and human dimensions of their work, confidence grows organically.
2- Continuous Learning as Corporate Strategy
Forward-looking mining organizations now treat professional development as part of their ESG strategy. Tailings governance frameworks often include competency matrices and mandatory training paths for engineers, operators, and executives.
By investing in education:
Technical risks are reduced through improved design and monitoring.
Reputational risks are mitigated by consistent, transparent communication.
Operational efficiency improves as data-driven decision-making replaces reactive management.
This transformation requires viewing learning not as a cost center but as an engine of trust—a measurable contributor to business continuity and public confidence.
3- The Role of Cross-Disciplinary Skills
The future tailings professional will not be defined solely by engineering discipline.
They will need to integrate:
Data analytics for predictive modeling,
Environmental science for ecosystem restoration,
Social engagement for stakeholder dialogue, and
Ethical leadership for transparent decision-making.
This multidisciplinary skillset cannot be achieved through one-time education. It must evolve through structured, lifelong learning embedded into every stage of a professional’s journey.
From Technical Integrity to Public Trust
The mining industry’s challenge is not only to design safer tailings facilities, but to restore public confidence in its capacity to manage them. The pathway from tailings to trust runs through three interconnected commitments:
Education – Building a workforce capable of understanding complexity and acting on evidence.
Transparency – Communicating truthfully, early, and clearly to all stakeholders.
Competence – Sustaining professional excellence through continuous learning and accountability.
Responsible tailings management begins in the classroom, matures in the field, and endures through culture. The engineers and organizations that lead this transformation will not only prevent failure—they will redefine what it means to operate responsibly.
Mining’s future legitimacy will not be built by technology alone, but by the human capacity to learn, adapt, and act with integrity.
