Browse all documents

Summary

AI-generated

This summary is written by a language model reading the source document. It is not the publisher's words and is not a substitute for the original.

Learn more about AI enrichment

This guide outlines the criteria and risk assessments for mining activities within high-importance biodiversity priority areas. It establishes a rigorous set of filters and a risk-averse approach to determine if mining is an optimal land use compared to the preservation of critical ecosystems and water resources.

Key insights

AI-generated

These insights are written by a language model reading the source document. They are not the publisher's words and are not a substitute for the original.

Learn more about AI enrichment
  • Certain biodiversity priority areas are identified as having the highest risk for mining because their significance to ecosystem services, such as water provisioning and flow regulation, makes it highly likely that new mining projects will face 'fatal flaw' issues or be denied necessary authorisations.
  • The guide identifies four specific categories of high-importance biodiversity priority areas: Ramsar sites; River and wetland Freshwater Ecosystem Priority Areas (FEPAs) including a 1km buffer; Critical Biodiversity Areas (CBAs) or equivalent irreplaceable areas; and ecosystems classified as endangered (EN) or critically endangered (CR) under the Biodiversity Act.
  • To determine if mining should be permitted in these priority areas, a sequential set of six filters must be applied. These include proving the minerals are of strategic national interest, confirming no alternative deposits exist in less sensitive areas, demonstrating that substitute habitats can be provided, and conducting a full economic valuation to prove mining is the optimum sustainable land use.
  • The document advocates for a 'risk-averse and cautious approach' to mining in these areas, suggesting that mining should be strongly avoided. If permitted, it may be restricted to specific methods, such as underground rather than surface mining, or require biodiversity offsets to compensate for curtailed ecosystem services.

Cite the original document

APA
Centre for Environmental Rights (n.d.). zo-41-9f1d004e7669e639.pdf. https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/ZO-41.pdf?x21779
Chicago
Centre for Environmental Rights. zo-41-9f1d004e7669e639.pdf. n.d. https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/ZO-41.pdf?x21779.
Wikipedia
{{cite report |author=Centre for Environmental Rights |title=zo-41-9f1d004e7669e639.pdf |url=https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/ZO-41.pdf?x21779 |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}
BibTeX
@techreport{centreforenvironmentalrightsndzo419f1d004e7669e639pdf, author = {{Centre for Environmental Rights}}, title = {{zo-41-9f1d004e7669e639.pdf}}, institution = {Centre for Environmental Rights}, url = {https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/ZO-41.pdf?x21779}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }

Full text

Collected · Record updated