IGF Mining Policy Framework Assessment: Suriname

The assessment finds that while Suriname's Constitution and Mining Decree provide a general basis for mining governance, the legal framework is outdated, lacking a national environmental authority and specific legislation on indigenous rights and mercury use. Key strengths include the use of comprehensive environmental assessment guidelines by NIMOS and the role of the OGS in managing the small-scale gold sector. However, significant gaps exist in financial benefit optimization, socioeconomic planning, and post-mining transition, particularly regarding financial assurances for mine closure. The report recommends updating the Mining Decree, establishing an environmental ministry, and further formalizing the artisanal and small-scale mining (ASM) sector.

• Suriname's primary mining legislation, the Mining Decree of 1986, is outdated and fails to reflect modern best practices, omitting critical requirements for environmental and social impact assessments, financial assurances for mine closure, and the protection of women and children.
• There is a critical absence of a national environmental authority or governing legislation to enforce protections, leaving the advisory body NIMOS to administer Environmental Assessment Guidelines Volume II – Mining (2005) which, while comprehensive, are not legally binding.
• The government faces significant revenue losses due to the largely informal nature of the artisanal and small-scale mining (ASM) sector, where tax and royalty collection is minimal.
• The lack of national legislation recognizing indigenous and tribal rights, specifically regarding land and resources, creates persistent tensions between indigenous communities, mine operators, and ASM miners.
• Suriname lacks a formal system for post-mining transition, with no requirements for financial assurances to cover closure costs and no state-level policy for addressing abandoned or orphaned mines.
• Mercury use is widespread in the ASM sector, leading to significant ecosystem contamination and health risks, exacerbated by the fact that Suriname has not yet ratified the Minamata Convention on Mercury.
• The permitting process for mining is perceived by stakeholders as opaque and unstable due to the high level of discretionary power held by the President and the Minister.
• The Ordening Goud Sector (OGS) effectively manages conflicts between large-scale and small-scale miners and has registered approximately 19,000 miners to increase formalization.

APA

Crawford, A., & Bliss, M. (2017). IGF Mining Policy Framework Assessment: Suriname. International Institute for Sustainable Development. https://www.iisd.org/system/files/publications/suriname-mining-policy-framework-assessment-en.pdf

Chicago

Crawford, Alec, and Matthew Bliss. IGF Mining Policy Framework Assessment: Suriname. International Institute for Sustainable Development, 2017. https://www.iisd.org/system/files/publications/suriname-mining-policy-framework-assessment-en.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Crawford |first1=Alec |last2=Bliss |first2=Matthew |title=IGF Mining Policy Framework Assessment: Suriname |publisher=International Institute for Sustainable Development |date=May 2017 |url=https://www.iisd.org/system/files/publications/suriname-mining-policy-framework-assessment-en.pdf |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{crawford2017igf, author = {Crawford, Alec and Bliss, Matthew}, title = {{IGF Mining Policy Framework Assessment: Suriname}}, institution = {International Institute for Sustainable Development}, year = {2017}, month = may, url = {https://www.iisd.org/system/files/publications/suriname-mining-policy-framework-assessment-en.pdf}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }