Discourse Analysis of the Solwara 1 project : Storylines about the sustainability of a deep-sea mining project in Papua New Guinea

(1)

Department of Thematic Studies Environmental Change

Discourse Analysis of the Solwara 1 project

Storylines about the sustainability of a deep-sea mining project in Papua New

Guinea

Stefania Chirico

MSc Thesis (30 ECTS credits) Science for Sustainable development

(2)

1

Upphovsrätt

Detta dokument hålls tillgängligt på Internet – eller dess framtida ersättare – under 25 år från publiceringsdatum under förutsättning att inga extraordinära omständigheter uppstår. Tillgång till dokumentet innebär tillstånd för var och en att läsa, ladda ner, skriva ut enstaka kopior för enskilt bruk och att använda det oförändrat för ickekommersiell forskning och för undervisning. Överföring av upphovsrätten vid en senare tidpunkt kan inte upphäva detta tillstånd. All annan användning av dokumentet kräver upphovsmannens medgivande. För att garantera äktheten, säkerheten och tillgängligheten finns lösningar av teknisk och administrativ art.

Upphovsmannens ideella rätt innefattar rätt att bli nämnd som upphovsman i den omfattning som god sed kräver vid användning av dokumentet på ovan beskrivna sätt samt skydd mot att dokumentet ändras eller presenteras i sådan form eller i sådant sammanhang som är kränkande för upphovsmannens litterära eller konstnärliga anseende eller egenart. För ytterligare information om Linköping University Electronic Press se förlagets hemsida http://www.ep.liu.se/.

Copyright

The publishers will keep this document online on the Internet – or its possible replacement – for a period of 25 years starting from the date of publication barring exceptional circumstances.

The online availability of the document implies permanent permission for anyone to read, to download, or to print out single copies for his/hers own use and to use it unchanged for non- commercial research and educational purpose. Subsequent transfers of copyright cannot revoke this permission. All other uses of the document are conditional upon the consent of the copyright owner. The publisher has taken technical and administrative measures to assure authenticity, security and accessibility.

According to intellectual property law the author has the right to be mentioned when his/her work is accessed as described above and to be protected against infringement.

For additional information about the Linköping University Electronic Press and its procedures for publication and for assurance of document integrity, please refer to its www home page: http://www.ep.liu.se/.

(3)

2

Abstract

The recent global trend of energy consumption shows that new sources of minerals are needed to sustain the demand that is expected in the following years.

One of the suggestions that has emerged to provide minerals is mining the seafloor, which even if mostly unexplored, seems to be potentially rich in copper and other minerals. The possible imminent first deep-sea mining project in Papua New Guinea, called Solwara 1, could be the beginning of a new phase in the history of mining. However, the project has raised questions about the risks in terms of environmental damages and socio-economic changes that the citizens of Papua New Guinea might not be able to handle.

This paper conducts a discourse analysis of the case, studying its sustainability through the storylines approach, focusing on the impacts on the environment and society.

Keywords: deep-sea mining, Solwara 1, storylines, discourse coalitions, discourse analysis.

Abbreviations

SMS Seafloor massive sulfide DSM Deep sea mining

EIS Environmental Impacts Statement

ESBA Environmental and Social Benchmarking Analysis GDP Gross domestic product

ISA International Seabed Authority NGO Non-governmental organization PNG Papua New Guinea

(5)

4

Introduction

Minerals are massively used for different purposes and they are a fundamental component for the survival of society: they produce energy, they produce fuel and are able to provide the most important functions to a population growing at an exponential rate (Carvalho, 2017). Today, there are over 7.3 billion people in the world and this number has dramatically increased in the last century because of the improvements in the health sector and the development of new economies (UN, 2017). Countries like China and India, representing 19 and 18 % of the world’s population respectively, are growing both in terms of GDP and consumption patterns and consequently, the rate of consumption is predicted to increase as well as the demand for minerals (UN, 2017; UN, 2015). Governments and companies have started to investigate new ways of producing energy and get access to minerals to sustain this pattern without facing an energy crisis.

Currently, the major method to provide minerals is through terrestrial mining. This sector attracts investments and a considerable number of mines have been opened recently in Latin America, Africa and Asia (ICMM, 2012). Investments to improve the technologies available in the field have been initiated but the costs to produce them are getting unsustainable and other solutions need to be found (Bardi, 2013). Therefore, alternative sources of energy are being developed and explored: renewable sources like solar, wind or biofuel but also other methods of mining have been explored like mining the seafloor of the oceans, also known as deep sea mining. Deep sea mining (DSM) is recently begun to emerge as a new possibility to provide natural resources to produce energy as the body of research conducted on the sites has highlighted that the seafloor is particularly rich in copper, gold, zinc and silver - minerals that are extremely required by society.

The deep sea starts 200m below the surface of the ocean where the water has an average temperature of 3ºC, contains very little oxygen, no plants and is inhabited by some rare bacteria and animals, creating a habitat which is unique in the world (WWF, 2019). The deep sea is also rich in polymetallic nodules made of manganese, iron, platinum and tellurium and of seafloor massive sulfides (SMS), containing sulfides, copper, gold, zinc, lead, barium, and silver (Moskvitch, 2018). There are lots of uncertainties linked to the extraction of these minerals from the seafloor because it is a recent and new mining process that might have destructive environmental effects on the marine ecosystem and on the biodiversity of the sea (Dover, 2010) . At the same time, the amount of minerals that are available in the deep sea might be the solution to face the future energy challenges. In order to understand better

(6)

5 the potential effects of deep-sea mining in terms of sustainability, this paper will analyze the Solwara 1 case, the most relevant one in the field as it represents the first large-scale project of deep-sea mining.

Aim

The aim of this study is to identify and analyze the discourse coalitions that have emerged in the past years in the conflict concerning the sustainability of the Solwara 1 project. The analysis has been done using the argumentative method by Maarten Hajer, recognizing the motives and the elements leading to the creation of coalitions through the storyline approach (1995). This paper will first analyze the problem and contextualize the issue socio-historically, then it will proceed presenting the method and in the last part it will show the results and answer to the research questions.

Problem formulation

Extracting minerals and materials to support the current lifestyle is becoming problematic, especially because of the challenges and the effects on the environment and society. When new extraction methods are being explored, like deep-sea mining, it is essential to conduct studies in order to have a better understanding of the matter. The approval of Solwara 1 and the possible starting of it, brings a series of doubts and questions linked to it, especially considering the lack of specific regulations available at the moment. Using a specific case, such as Solwara 1, gives concreteness to the matter and makes more visual and understandable the main problematic points that might emerge also for future cases linked to deep sea mining.

The main debates on the subject are focused on the sustainability of deep sea mining, as there are diverging points of view and opinions on that. The environment, the society and the economy are the parameters considered to validate or not the potential benefits of this new mining method, using studies and reports on Solwara 1 to evaluate that.

Research questions

The research questions helping to fulfill the aim of this study are:

(7)

6 ● What perspectives on environmental, social and economic dimensions can be elaborated from this analysis, thanks to the storylines constructed?

● Do the storylines present points in common?

● Does this analysis present similar results from previous research?

Method

Discourse analysis

The method chosen to answer to the research questions and the aim of this thesis is a discourse analysis. The discourse analysis answers to the aim of the thesis, which is showing how actors represent the reality they are in, with a complete overview of the issue considered.

According to the social constructionist theory and Hajer, socio-economic phenomena are often the result of several perceptions of reality and depend on the context the perceiving individuals are in, making the phenomena a construction (Hajer, M., & Versteeg, W. (2005). In this process, where the reality is constructed, the use of language is relevant because it is the tool used to shape the representations of reality by who is constructing it (Hajer, M., & Versteeg, W. 2005). Language in this case assumes a relevant role and it is not just passively presenting an issue. For the Solwara 1 case, a socio-economic phenomenon, there are several constructions of the reality available, generating chaos for the public or whoever aims to have a complete overview of the topic. Most of this chaotic framework is due to the fact that there are not enough regulations established yet as deep-sea mining has emerged just in the last years. According to Hajer, M., & Versteeg, W.:

environmental debates often take place in a situation of institutional ambiguity, in which there are no generally accepted rules and norms according to which politics is to be conducted and policy measures are to be agreed upon (2005, p.182).

Several approaches to conduct a discourse analysis can be adopted, choosing according to what is the goal of the reasoning. In this case the storylines approach is the one suitable to answer to the research questions as storylines have the capacity to gather various discourses, simplifying them and shaping a specific construction of the reality of a phenomenon and construct discourse coalitions (Hajer, 2005).

(8)

7 Overall, storylines could be taken as the discursive cement that keeps a discourse coalition together (Hajer, 1995, p. 65).

Storylines are also flexible and can change according to the context, making them a good choice for topics evolving and changing according to the data available, like the deep sea mining issue (Hajer, 2005). Storylines allow also to identify what the main coalitions involved are as actors can share a set of storylines, answering to one of the research questions of this thesis (Hajer, 2006: 70). Studying the backgrounds and the sources of the storylines helps to understand why these coalitions have been created and what the reasons behind them are. There are other scientific papers that have used this method in the discourse analysis of mining issues, such as Suopajärvi (2015), who explores mining issues in Lapland; Orhan (2006) about the mining issue in Turkey and Bjørs about the uranium mines in Greenland (2016). The focus will lay on these papers in the previous research section of this thesis and partially in the conclusive discussion.

Storylines and sustainability

In order to conduct the discourse analysis, the methodology used follows as a guideline the method in Suopajärvi, 2015.

The texts used as references have been read and the most relevant sentences highlighted, taking notes about recurring elements and words found, such as “sustainable”, “environment”, “social” and “economic”. After identifying the recurring elements in the text, they have been extracted and then formed statements that have in turn been grouped according to their content and representation of reality, creating storylines. The first storyline focuses on all the progress and new opportunities offered by DSM compared to terrestrial copper mining, while and the second one focuses on the risks in terms of environmental and socio-economic impacts of the project.

The focus on the sustainability dimension is mainly due to the fact that in general, the analysis of the environmental and socio-economic impacts are the ones more frequently considered in scientific and media debates, also in the case of Solwara 1 for example. The sustainability dimension has been considered also in the other text used for the comparison with this thesis, showing it is a recurring criterion to analyze the mining topic (Suopajärvi, 2015). As defined by the Brundtland Commission in 1987, sustainable means “meeting the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs” (World Commission on Environment and Development, 1987). There have been several interpretations of this definition and one of the most popular and followed is the one

(9)

8 proposed by Scott Campbell, which represents the sustainability concept as a triangle (Campbell, 1996). The three vertexes of the triangle are “economy,” “environment,” and “society”. The economic part includes jobs, costs, revenues; the environmental ones refers to the protection of ecosystem and biodiversity, while the societal vertex focuses on the well-being of communities, their education and respect of their rights (Kemp and Martins, 2007). Even if the three vertexes approach is one of the most used, it gives space to several controversies. In fact, it is not easy to balance the three dimensions and one of them might not be considered enough, producing an ineffective interconnection (Kemp and Martins, 2007). In addition, considering the abstract character of the definition of sustainability, people with different mindsets can attribute to sustainability what they consider to be the “proper interpretation”, creating debates and conflicts. The conflict around the sustainability of Solwara 1 is also due to this clash of perspectives.

Limitations and other methods

The discourse analysis conducted on the Solwara 1 issue presents a series of limitations. First of all, the fact that the discourse analysis is considering these particular storylines might have omitted relevant information and issues, such as the emergence of a new capitalism where companies are exploiting resources from developing countries, or a deeper focus on the economic growth. In addition, there are other relevant dimensions that might have been chosen for the focus of the thesis as the question around the Solwara 1 case is not just limited to the sustainability of it. There are more elements that should be considered with the result that this analysis might be reductive.

The choice of the number of storylines might be questionable as well. In fact, some studies as Suopajärvi, selected three storylines instead of two and maybe a bigger number could have exposed more relevant points about the case with more detailed and complete results (2015). However, sometimes choosing more storylines can create misunderstandings, confusion and repetition of concepts, so it might result easier for the reader to have just two storylines.

Concerning other methods, this one has been chosen and considered most suitable for this thesis because the topic is still under development and it is not possible to conduct a quantitative study with the data available. In fact, it would be complicated to collect data in the field as there are lots of uncertainties and prohibitions. Moreover, in order to conduct quantitative research, the aim should have been more technically oriented. Qualitative research using questionnaires or interviews has been avoided as well because it would not

(10)

9 answer to the research questions and because identifying the stakeholders involved and relevant to the Solwara 1 project would have been challenging.

Material

The material used is mainly from reports and articles, especially reports coming from the company that is in charge of the Solwara 1 project, Nautilus Minerals. The other reports used are the results of the “Deep-sea mining campaign”, a campaign that works to protect the ocean and to stop deep sea mining.

These are the main texts used:

The EIS, the Environmental impact Statement, 2008, the document that has been redacted in order to grant the environmental permit to Nautilus from Papua New Guinea’s Government and that presents the impacts of Solwara 1 on the environment. It was written by an Australian environmental consultant agency called Coffey Natural Systems that realized the study for Nautilus, with the goal to provide an assessment of potential risks and mitigation strategies deriving from the realization of this project (Luick, 2012);

the ESBA, Environmental and Social Benchmarking Analysis, 2015, an analysis commissioned by Nautilus about the Social and Environmental benefits of deep-sea mining compared to terrestrial mining;

Accountability Zero: A Critique of Nautilus Minerals Environmental and Social Benchmarking Analysis of the Solwara 1 project, 2015, which analyzes the ESBA, criticizing some of the points and statements announced there;

Physical Oceanographic Assessment of the Nautilus Environmental Impact Statement for the Solwara 1 Project - An Independent Review, 2012, which criticizes the EIS presented by Coffey Natural;

Out of our Depth: Mining the Ocean Floor in Papua New Guinea, 2011, analyzing the environmental impacts of Solwara 1;

Coalitions, Practices, and Meaning in Environmental Politics: From Acid Rain to BSE, 2005, describing discourse analysis elements.

(11)

10 The Politics of Environmental Discourse: Ecological Modernization and the Policy Process, 1995.

The references chosen are from the years when the case was contemplated and planned till nowadays, ranging from the official documents presented by Nautilus, to the ones used for the anti-deep-sea mining campaign. All the data collected is available online, on the Nautilus Minerals website and the “Deep sea mining campaign” website for what concerns the reports; in catalogues like ResearchGate and Retriever but also in form of articles found on the web, accessible to everyone. Limitations related to the data are due to the difficulty in finding peer-reviewed scientific papers to use for the analysis, as the majority of available material is reports and only few texts are reviewed.

Previous research and background

This section describes the previous research and the background about mines, deep-sea mining and the Solwara 1 case. The previous research section analyzes some discourse analysis that have been done about mining issues, the background section starts with a broad overview on deep sea mining and the timeline of Solwara 1.

Previous research

The Solwara 1 project has been developed just in the last 20 years, therefore not a lot of research about it is available. Previous research is based on data from similar contexts instead of data collected on-site, such as ecosystems available on the surface of the Earth. There are no equivalent examples to this case and there is very little information about the deep sea, as mentioned in Grey and Rosenbaum,

Little is known about the properties of the deep sea and studies identifying ecosystem services and establishing their values are lacking (2015, p.8).

However, discourse analyses that are more generally focused on mining cases, are available in academic environments, especially using the discourse analysis developed by Hajer. Suopajärvi uses a discourse analysis to explore mining issues in Lapland, following a structure similar to this thesis and the storylines approach (2015). In this text, the author analyses the social impact assessments of the mines in Finnish Lapland, identifying three storylines (Suopajärvi, 2015). The storylines explore the advantages of the mining industry in Lapland

(12)

11 (2015). Another author, Orhan, uses storylines to conduct the discourse analysis for a gold mine conflict in Turkey (2006). The author presents two opposing discourse coalitions through the storylines approach and investigates the role of the institution in the perception of the risks deriving from the project. Two coalitions are identified: the environmentalist one and the pro-mining one, stressing the opposition between the two discourses. The same method is used by Bjørst (year) to face the mining topic in the case of Greenland and the uranium mining there. He develops an analysis using the idea of conflicting storylines and how the language can shape reality: mining in Greenland transformed into mining for Greenland (2016).

These studies have been used as a reference for the analysis in this study, which is the first discourse analysis conducted on the Solwara 1 case. Previous research distinctly focusing on the Solwara 1 project is mainly found in scientific reports or studies presenting scientific data about specific issues as the plumes that might result from the mining operations, the technology to be used as well as the bacteria and organisms living on the site (Miller et al., 2018). Other articles about the topic focus on the precautionary principle in general, exploring the regulatory and legal field of deep-sea mining, a topic that has been mentioned in the second storyline (SPREP, 2015).

Background

Mines have always been objects of conflicts in society, because they modify the environment and the landscapes of the area around them, impacting the lifestyle of the communities as well. Even if they provide a viable source of income, they have always raised ethical questions about their legitimacy, especially in the last years, when new mines have been opened in areas rich in forests and vital for the ecosystem of the area (Hilson, 2002). Often, these conflicts arise in developing countries where economies and livelihoods are based on the land without adequate regulations to protect it (Hilson, 2002). Deep sea mining seems to follow the same trend and has attracted a lot of attention concerning issues linked to its impacts on the environment, the community and the economies of the areas interested in this phenomenon. Solwara 1 is in fact a site situated in Papua New Guinea (PNG), a nation with a critical economy and government and land rich in Seafloor massive sulfides (SMS), making it particularly attractive for mining industries.

(13)

12

I. Deep sea mining

Seafloor massive sulfides (SMS), the deposits in the seafloor rich in minerals, are linked to the hydrothermal vents activity along oceanic ridges and need millions of years to form (Hein et al., 2013; Miller et al., 2018). They contain a lot of raw materials like minerals that can be used commercially, and they have attracted the attention of several actors in the mineral sector. However, the control over this natural resource is partly regulated by international agreements. According to the current regulations for the ownership of the seabed and the UNCLOS agreement signed by more than 150 governments, a country controls the sea area that extends to 12 nautical miles from its coastline (United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, 1982). Such a country is called a coastal state and has exclusive jurisdiction over the area, including the control of the seabed resources within the 200-nautical mile of the exclusive economic zone (Miller et al., 2018). Therefore, in case a company is interested in exploring or using marine resources included in these 200 nautical miles, it must request the permission from the government controlling that space.

For the areas in the ocean that are not controlled by a government, the International Seabed Authority regulates the exploitation of sea resources, ensuring the protection of the environment (ISA, 2019). There are lots of companies, entities and governments interested in the development of DSM, e.g., Poland, India, the Federal Institute for Geosciences and Natural Resources of the Federal Republic of Germany, the Republic of Korea, China and Russia (ISA, 2019). These countries have passed through the ISA authority and already got their contracts for exploration for polymetallic sulphides in the South West Indian Ridge, Central Indian Ridge and the Mid-Atlantic Ridge and in the Western Pacific Ocean (ISA, 2019) However, other companies and countries prefer to address their interest directly to countries that have the jurisdiction over potentially profitable seafloors, like in the case of Nautilus and the Solwara 1 site in Papua New Guinea.

II. Solwara 1

Since 1985, the territorial waters of Papua New Guinea have been explored and sites containing sulphide mineral sources were discovered (Nautilus Minerals, 2019). In specific, the Solwara 1 site was discovered by Australia's Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization, in 1996, in the Bismarck Sea (Dombrowsky, 2018). From that year, research has been conducted on that site especially by Nautilus Minerals, a Canadian mineral company specialized in seabed exploration that showed from the beginning its interest in a possible commercial mining of that site (Nautilus Minerals, 2019).

(14)

13 Nautilus was originally an Australian company with headquarters in Canada, focusing on the sea area around Papua New Guinea (Nautilus Minerals, 2019). In October 2008, Nautilius Minerals, intentioned to pursue the goal of getting an environmental permit for the development of the Solwara 1 project, wrote the required Environmental Impact statement (EIS) and applied for the Environmental Permit, obtaining it in November 2009 from Papua New Guinean government (Coffey Natural Systems, 2008; Nautilus Minerals, 2019). However, after the permit to develop the Solwara 1 project has been granted, some economic issues led to a slowdown of the project even after Nautilus obtained the mining lease for the site. The latter required several consultations with the Government of Papua New Guinea, especially concerning the terms of the concession, but the license was finally obtained in 2010, when the Papua New Guinea's prime minister, Michael Somare, granted the 20-year mining permission (Ottery, 2010). This lease gives Nautilus exclusive rights to extract and sell the minerals from the area. The documents were never made public but according to several sources and articles, PNG is a partner in this project and holds part of the shares.

The approval of the mining lease alarmed concerned citizens that decided to start the Deep- Sea Mining Campaign, in 2011. It gathered citizens from Papua New Guinea, Australia and Canada, concerned with the impacts of deep-sea mining both on the ecosystems but also on the society living in that area as the ocean are sources of food and livelihoods for the local population (Huffpost, 2017). The campaign is active through the creation of material and studies to prove that deep sea mining is harmful for the environment and the community. Despite this strong opposition, many countries as Japan, China, Korea, the UK, the US, Canada, Germany, Australia and Russia are waiting to see if Solwara 1 will be a success before taking the risk to start a similar project in other areas. Especially China seems to be particularly interested and has addressed a lot of efforts in the seabed mining industry, with 39 oceanic expeditions, and is aspiring to invest more to maintain its primacy in the mineral market (Page, 2018). However, in May 2019 the situation is still static for Nautilus, as no progress has been made in the project.

Results

Energy provision has always created debates, especially when it comes to the balance economy-energy-environment. In the Solwara 1 case, the project aims to achieve economical results, but this might affect the environment and the communities of the area. Papua New Guinea relies on sectors that are directly connected to nature like agriculture and fishing, but

(15)

14 minerals might be the solution to increase the welfare of PNG in terms of services and infrastructures for the citizens and a growth in GDP (The World Bank, 2019). At the same time, private companies and more powerful countries are investing in resources or buying leases for several years to exploit the resources of other countries. This form of appropriation of new resources has generated numerous problems for the local populations relying on natural resources.

The different interpretations of sustainability are the starting point for the creation of the storylines and the coalitions in the Solwara 1 case. From the two main storylines identified, two discourse coalitions emerge: the first one represented by Nautilus and the anti-deep-sea mining campaign as the second one. The two coalitions display opposing storylines by talking about the same topics but with different constructions. The first storyline presents strong points to support the claim that the project is sustainable in terms of environmental, social and economic benefits; the second storyline instead highlights the non-sustainability and risks represented by Solwara 1, especially the lack of consideration of the precautionary principle and the lack of data available. This section will present the two storylines and their main themes.

I. Storyline: the Solwara 1 project is a sustainable solution for the

future compared to terrestrial copper mining

The main storyline that can be deducted from the reports presented by Nautilus is that the Solwara 1 project is a sustainable solution for the future compared to terrestrial copper mining. In fact, the Solwara 1 project was created with the goal to mine the site using methods that are “socially acceptable, environmentally responsible, technologically achievable and economically viable”, according to what stated in the Environmental Impact statement, EIS (Coffey Natural Systems, 2008).

Being the proponent of the first seafloor mining of its kind, Nautilus has, with the assistance of the scientists involved, committed to a number of conservative mitigation measures aimed to ensure the protection of biodiversity and to demonstrate the ecological sustainability of the operation (Coffey Natural Systems, 2008, p. 9).

The environmental sustainability of Solwara 1 is argued to be due to the fact that there is a lack of impacts on air quality, on water consumption and on soil degradation as well as the fact that the marine ecosystem is able to adapt faster and better to the changes produced by the mining process, compared to terrestrial ecosystems. It seems that the fauna living in the seabed is able to adapt quicker to the mining effects compared to the one affected by

(16)

15 terrestrial copper mining and might be able to recolonize faster, reaching the same conditions as before (Batker and Schmidt, 2015; Tunnicliffe et al., 1997). In addition, deep sea mining would not affect neither the chimneys nor the vents on the seafloor as mentioned in the EIS:

First, the geothermal energy source that underpins the vent ecosystem will not be extinguished by mining, and chimney structures will reform around vents once mining ceases in each particular area. This has been observed and demonstrated during Nautilus’ environmental assessment campaigns. The essential conditions for faunal succession from microbial organisms to more complex macrobenthic communities will therefore reform relatively rapidly (Coffey Natural Systems, 2008, p.21).

Also, air quality is a strong point brought forward in favor of deep sea mining. In fact, terrestrial mining is particularly harmful compared to deep sea mining, because some of the waste produced is dissolved in the air and in the water, generating risks for the health of the community living in the area, both for humans and animals (Singh and Singh, 2016). Moreover, gas emissions from mining activities such as explosions, disperse the waste in the air, affecting its quality and generating another danger for the species living there (Singh and Singh, 2016). Air quality would not be decreased in the Solwara 1 project as the operations would take place underwater and far away from the populated area, avoiding all these possible dangers and being a safer solution.

The site is 30 km offshore and thus will have no measurable air quality impacts on communities in New Ireland and New Britain (Batker and Schmidt, 2015, p.58).

Terrestrial copper mining has other negative consequences for the environment. It consumes big quantities of water, polluting it with contaminants and affecting negatively the ecosystems around the area with disastrous consequences for the organisms living there (Singh and Singh, 2016). From the studies conducted about Solwara 1, the mining operations would not consume terrestrial water during the extraction or refining phases and would just desalinate the water (Batker and Schmidt, 2015). The salt in the residual water, according to some tests mentioned in the ESBA, would not have significant negative impacts (Batker and Schmidt, 2015).

In addition, terrestrial copper mining, affects the quality of the soil as well as economic activities like agriculture (Hirwa et al., 2019). Healthy soils can store water, filter it, provide nutrients to forests and crops, which is fundamental for the Earth’s functions (SSSA, 2015). Deep-sea mining would not contribute to soil erosion or contaminate it as it takes place in areas without vegetation or culture as mentioned in the ESBA:

(17)

16 Food production, fresh water supply, disaster risk reduction, pollination, soil formation, erosion, freshwater regulation, recreation, historic, and cultural values will not be impacted by Solwara 1 (Batker and Schmidt , 2015).

The storyline talks about all three dimensions of sustainability and the social sphere is relevant as well. According to this storyline and this coalition, the communities living close to the Solwara 1 area would benefit from this project and the impacts on the community would be limited, due to Solwara 1 convering only a small area of around 0.112 km2 (Coffey Natural Systems, 2008). In the Solwara 1 case, there are no issues related to the control over the land, the preparation of the site or historical monuments that might be destroyed. Its strategic position in the ocean and far away from the inhabited land would avoid the typical problems that a terrestrial mine can generate. The quality of the environment and some livelihood-sustaining activities are damaged by terrestrial mining operations and would eventually cause displacement and resettlement of the community, which might not be able to adapt to the new context (Singh and Singh, 2016). In addition, terrestrial mines need a considerable amount of infrastructure, including roads and constructions, to function, while for deep sea mining is not necessary to build lots of new infrastructure, with less impacts on the landscape (Hein et al., 2013). As mentioned in the EIS:

Firstly, it is extremely small scale; there is no need for site preparation or construction of complex facilities, no machinery for moving and storing overburden and no direct landowner issues. (Coffey Natural Systems, 2008, p.14)

According to the EIS, there would also be some general improvements in terms of work as PNG citizens might be employed and trained to work in the mine, increasing the human capital of PNG and opportunities for local businesses to grow (Coffey Natural Systems, 2008). Papua New Guinea would receive mining royalties thanks to this project and this funding could be used for education and increasing the welfare status of the country (Batker and Schmidt, 2015). This could benefit PNG a lot since currently 6 million people living there can be defined as ‘chronically poor’ because of the lack of investments in the sectors relevant for the growth of the GDP and the geographical position. Some people live in areas that are difficult to access without enough roads to connecting them to the main cities, leading to these people relying on agriculture without other ways of sustaining themselves (Cammack, 2008). The EIS states:

The Project will bring benefits in the form of royalties and improvements in the nation’s balance of trade. While employment and business opportunities are not as high for Phase 1 as with other mines, potential will be generated for new industrial development that will have positive social and economic effects within PNG. (Coffey Natural Systems, 2008, p.1)

(18)

17 Moreover, it has been predicted that earth’s solid surface resides in the deep seabed and the copper mineralization grade there is approximately 7%, a percentage considered very high compared to the 1% grade found in the terrestrial mines analyzed, potentially implying a more efficient extraction of copper in the deep seabed (Batker and Schmidt, 2015). Terrestrial copper mining is also strongly dependent on weather conditions, in case of rain or other weather factors, it might be not possible to mine the site. Deep sea mining instead, does not depend on it, facilitating continuous operations without any waste of time and money (Batker and Schmidt, 2015). As mentioned:

[…] weather at the sea floor is consistent, facilitating smooth, continuous operations. In March 2015, all mining stopped at Chuquicamata (the world’s largest copper mine) and five other large copper mines in Northern Chile due to a heavy rainstorm that washed out the mine roads and flooded open pits (Batker and Schmidt, 2015, p.97).

In conclusion, this storyline highlights the current risks that terrestrial copper mining is causing to the communities and the environment. The benefits supported by this storyline and its coalitions are shown for all three spheres defining sustainability. The current situation of unemployment and economic instability that PNG is living in nowadays, can be balanced by the Solwara 1 project, creating job opportunities and profits to invest into an increase of the wellbeing of the country. In addition, it would require less investments into infrastructures and relocation of the population and is more cost-effective than terrestrial mining, as the seabed contains higher concentrations of copper to extract.

II. Storyline: Deep sea mining and the Solwara 1 case represent a

menace for the environment and the socio-economic status of the

communities

According to the second storyline, deep-sea mining and the Solwara 1 case represent a menace for the environment and the local communities: it is a threat to the ecosystem and to the welfare of the citizens of PNG. The discourses that have led to the creation of this storyline, sustain that there has been a lack of consideration towards the precautionary principle, which has both social and environmental effects in the Solwara 1 case. According to the United Nations World Charter For Nature (1982), if the effects of an activity are not totally predictable and can pose harms or risk to a community or to an environment, this principle should be applied and the activity should not be done until the effects are clear (Deep Sea Mining Campaign,2019). This serves to protect the people from unhealthy effects, and it is applied in several fields, especially when a new product or method of production are to be launched in the market. The flexibility of the concept of precautionary principle has led

(19)

18 to a lot of ambiguities when it comes to its application. In the Solwara 1 case, the lack of regulations and of the application of the precautionary principle have made PNG the perfect candidate for the first mining license due to the incapacity of PNG’s government to assume its power in front of companies that are aiming to start exploiting the seafloor (Rosenbaum, 2016).

Weak governance and institutions provide an ideal environment for companies evading public scrutiny and rigorous environmental regulation. It is no surprise that the world’s first sea bed mine received its license here (Rosenbaum, 2016).

The granting of the first mining lease for example, was mainly due to the lack of application of the mentioned precautionary principle and also the political and social problems of PNG. The Solwara 1 case is just part of a trend that sees the Government of PNG granting licenses and leases to foreign companies, impacting more than 700,000 citizens with disastrous consequences (ActNow, 2015). Unfortunately, the majority of the funds obtained from these leases has been used to corrupt members of the Government, instead of investing them in infrastructure and services for the citizens (Humans Right Watch, 2019).

Greenpeace has expressed its concerns as well, accusing deep sea mining to destroy ecosystem processes, and commissioning a study to investigate it, stating that it would be almost impossible not to negatively affect the seabed and the underwater ecosystem (Miller et al., 2018). One of the main points that has been presented in their report is the enormous gap in the scientific knowledge about the deep-sea environment and consequently also about the impacts that might affect the ecosystem and the fauna (Miller et al., 2018).This concern has been repeated also in other reports, such as in the one by Rosenbaum:

There is a high level of uncertainty about the impacts of DSM and the risks it poses to marine environments and communities. These uncertainties arise due to the lack of knowledge and experience about the technologies and processes under-pinning the mining system, the biodiversity and ecosystems of the deep ocean and particularly of hydrothermal vent systems including their capacity to re-establish after mining, currents at various levels of the ocean and the cumulative effects of DSM (2011. p.28).

Another possible impact of DSM is the noise that can disturb the fauna living there. The noise would affect the animals in the area, since for example fishes living at the seafloor communicate using low sound frequencies, especially in the search of food. Also, whales rely on sound for communication, socialization and navigation (Miller et al., 2018). The noises and the vibrations deriving from the operations could expand up to 600 km from the site, disturbing these natural functions and destabilizing the fauna (Steiner, 2009).

Anthropogenic noise is known to impact a number of fish species and marine mammals by inducing behavior changes, masking communication, and causing temporary threshold-shifts

(20)

19 in hearing or permanent damage depending on the species, type of noise and received level (Gomez et al., 2016; Nedelec et al., 2017) in Miller et al., 2018, p.15.

In addition, the information that is currently available about the growing time and the re-adaptation capacity of the organisms living there after the mining would take place is not enough and thus, the effects of mining an area containing 5000 years of mineral deposits are not predictable (Grey and Rosenbaum, 2015). Some of the organisms are characterized by slow growth rates and difficulties in recovery in case of changes to their environment. The release of sediments that might contain heavy metals and acid dangerous for the seabed habitat might either kill some organism or affect them in the long term, for example, reducing oxygen concentrations or contaminating the marine fauna and affecting consequently also the human health because of the fishing activities in that area (Craw, 2013).

The organisms living on the seafloor have not been studied enough yet and based on what has been highlighted previously, the recovery time might be several decades without the certainty of reaching the pre-mining conditions again (Miljutina et al., 2011). The few studies conducted until now have only shown results for a small portion of the terrain but the real effect that a larger scale project would have cannot be predicted (Miljutina et al., 2011). In case the recovery would not be complete, there might be a loss of quantity and varieties of species with grave consequences for the underwater ecosystem, starting from small organisms to bigger ones (Miljutina et al., 2011).

Since the meiobenthic represents a basic level in the food chain for larger animals, changes in meiobenthic communities may also lead to changes in macrobenthic and megabenthic communities (Miljutina et al., 2011, p.21)

The comparison between terrestrial and deep-sea mining is mentioned in the texts used to construct this storyline as well, but with lots of critics addressed to the former. In fact, the choice of the selected terrestrial mines to highlight their disadvantages, made in the ESBA, is very questionable: three of the world’s most destructive terrestrial mines have been chosen for the comparison, like the Bingham Canyon mine, the Prominent Hill mine and the Intag Mine in Ecuador (Grey and Rosenbaum , 2015). The first one, for example, is among the biggest mines in the world, while the Intag mine is particularly destructive for the environment because it is located in an area with lot of vegetation and is therefore leading to deforestation (Yestolifenotomining, 2019). It does not seem fair to compare terrestrial mines without using a serious criterion and just select the ones with the most impacts for the comparison (MiningGlobal, 2015). This is one of the examples of the criticism addressed to the ESBA because of its lack of concrete data and the questionable choice of using inputs referring to terrestrial values, so comparing two realities that cannot be compared in all their features.

(21)

20 […] comparison of the Solwara 1 project with three terrestrial mines raises serious methodological questions. Not only are terrestrial and marine ecosystems extremely different, but while much is known about the existing and potential impacts of mines on land, there is no equivalent information for the marine environment, as no deep sea mine has yet been developed (Grey and Rosenbaum, 2015, p.6).

Deep sea mining would affect also the health of both marine and human environments. In fact, as it would pollute the ocean, it would also contaminate the nutrition of the fish and consequently be a harm to the livelihoods of the local human communities relying on fishing activities, as fishing provides 35% of the protein source of the PNG's population. (Filer and Gabriel, 2016b; FAO, 2002).

[…] there was a perceived concern that the plume could carry metals suspended in solution that could be harmful to coastal communities of New Ireland and New Britain, coral reefs, or free-swimming pelagic organisms including tuna and other fish consumed by local coastal population (Luick, 2012, p.20) .

The seabed is also full of genetic resources that might be helpful to cure diseases in the future and are currently being studied to see if they are potentially helpful for a progress in the scientific community (Miller et al., 2018). In case the seafloor would be mined, these resources might not be available anymore, destroying the potential development of new medicines.

This storyline revolves around the lack of information and concrete data available concerning the project, in terms of impacts and accuracy. The common and most quoted argument from the reports used to construct this storyline is the lack of reliable and accurate data about the effects deep-sea mining would have on the ecosystem and society. It is recognized that the current state of technology is not enough to provide a prediction of the damages and that it is too precarious to rely on this uncertain data. Deep sea mining has the potential to be a real danger for the economy and welfare of the citizens as it might severely affects the fishing industry and the health of the community. Therefore, the precautionary principle should be considered. The results that might be obtained with the Solwara 1 project are not worth the risks and dangers it would bring on the local economy, the society and the environment of PNG.

(22)

21

Conclusion

The debates about the sustainability of Solwara 1 have a strong influence in defining the shape of the deep-sea mining issue and this discourse analysis is fundamental to show how sustainability is represented using the storylines approach, facilitating the complexity of the several discourses and clarifying which ones are the salient points of the Solwara 1 project. The storylines have created two coalitions approaching the sustainability of Solwara 1. The first coalition, characterized by Nautilus, the mineral company, claims that deep-sea mining is a valid and better alternative to terrestrial mining in terms of energy provision. They recognize the potential of this new mining method and the benefits it can bring for the environment and for the development of PNG. DSM would not have the same disastrous effects on the ecosystem as terrestrial mining. It would neither pollute the air, nor the soil, and the re-growing rate of the organisms living on the seafloor is faster than for terrestrial ones. Socially and economically speaking, deep sea mining would benefit the society with new businesses opportunities, investments to increasing the GDP and not requiring displacements of the community. According to the ESBA, copper recycling is not economically sustainable and there is not enough material to recycle. As recycling is not feasible and there is not an alternative to mining, one of the solutions available is DSM, that has fewer damaging effects than terrestrial mining (Batker and Schmidt, 2015).

The second coalition, constituted by the supporters of the “Deep sea mining campaign” and environmental groups like Greenpeace, argues that in terms of socio-ecological effects, authorizing and starting the Solwara 1 project is a harmful for PNG. The absence of regulations, the corruption of the government and the strong correlation between activities depending on the sea and livelihood are the main points presented in opposition to the development of the project. The Solwara 1 mining project is an environmental and societal danger that would result in the loss of relevant ecosystems and fundamental activities for PNG. Seabed mining is an issue that ISA and the governments should take care of, as the effects of it might be irreversible (Craw, 2013). The fact that the precautionary principle has been completely ignored and the data used to justify the project is not accurate are the main points of criticism raised. The risks and the efforts linked with this new mining method are too high to justify the results that might be obtained from it.

Concerning the comparison with the previous research which used the storylines approach to conduct a discourse analysis of a mining issue, there are several common traits as well as differences. In Suopajärvi, the storylines structure is similar to the one of this thesis, except for the fact that three storylines have been used instead of two (2015). Both the texts start with a presentation of the topic in general, describe the method used and then discuss the

(23)

22 results in a similar way. However, Suopajärvi uses just storylines that are focusing on the positive sides of mining and not divergent ones (Suopajärvi, 2015). This thesis instead, as it presents storylines that completely differ from each other, cannot formulate a conclusion that goes in one specific direction.

Another study that used storylines to conduct a discourse analysis is Orhan, focusing mainly on the role of institutions in shaping the discourses about the risks deriving from the Bergama gold mine dispute (2006). The central point of the paper is not the sustainability of the project, like in this thesis, but the concept of risk. Orhan constructs two opposite storylines differing completely from each other, while in the construction of the storylines of this thesis instead, there is not such a clear opposition between them (Orhan, 2006). In this thesis in fact, the storylines cannot be defined symmetrical as they do not describe the same crucial points but just mention some common questions, such as the comparison with terrestrial mining and also the impacts on the economy of PNG. This is due to the fact that some of the relevant arguments presented by the two coalitions about the sustainability of Solwara 1 are not always considering the same aspects. The last author, Bjørst, describes the mines of uranium in Greenland, using a similar approach to this thesis: two storylines that are ‘conflicting story lines’, supporting two opposite statements, ‘destroying’ and ‘saving’ (Bjørst, 2016). The study also clearly presents the two coalitions and focuses on them, creating a dualism in the analysis, with NGOs on one side and mining sector on the other. This dualism can be considered replicated in this thesis as the storylines are conflicting and create two opposing coalitions as well.

Finding a balance between the three dimensions of sustainability might prove particularly hard in the Solwara 1 case, considered all the uncertainties involved. Being able to protect the environment and the wellbeing of the communities, but at the same time provide energy for everyone and assuring a continuous economic growth, has become an ambitious goal. The sustainable triangle starts to be an outdated concept, especially in the energy provision field as now economic, social and environmental dimensions represent a trilemma, “a proposition composed of three contradictory mottos” (Martine and Alves, 2015). The two coalitions around the topic have expressed their position towards an environmental and societal issue that might have strong effects in the future, through the creation of material to divulge ideas and motives to support their points, using reports, articles and media resources. The discourse analysis is a valid tool to show the way they have constructed and designed their arguments and to present it to an audience that does not have previous knowledge about the topic and it helps to generate an overview about the issue.

(24)

23

References

ActNow (2015) ‘UNIVERSAL PERIODIC REVIEW PAPUA NEW GUINEA STAKEHOLDER SUBMISSION TO THE 25th SESSION OF THE UNIVERSAL PERIODIC REVIEW WORKING GROUP FROM ACT NOW !’.

Bardi, U. (2013) ‘The mineral question: how energy and technology will determine the future of mining’. Front. Energy Res., 24 December 2013 |

https://doi.org/10.3389/fenrg.2013.00009

Batker, D. and Schmidt, R. (2015) ‘Environmental and Social Benchmarking Analysis of the Nautilus Minerals Inc. Solwara 1 Project’. Earth Economics. Doi:

http://www.nautilusminerals.com/irm/content/pdf/eartheconomics-reports/earth-economics- may-2015.pdf

Bjørst, L. R. (2016) ‘Saving or destroying the local community? Conflicting spatial storylines in the Greenlandic debate on uranium’, Extractive Industries and Society, 3(1), pp. 34–40. doi: 10.1016/j.exis.2015.11.006.

Cammack, D. (2008) ‘Chronic Poverty in Papua New Guinea’. Doi:

http://www.chronicpoverty.org/uploads/publication_files/CPR2%20Background%20Papers %20Ca mmack%20New.pdf

Campbell, S. (1996) ‘Scott American Planning Association’, Journal of the American Planning Association; Summer, 62(3). Available at:

https://my.vanderbilt.edu/greencities/files/2014/08/Campbell1.pdf.

Carvalho, F. P. (2017) ‘Mining industry and sustainable development: Time for change’, Food and Energy Security, 6(2), pp. 61–77. doi: 10.1002/fes3.109.

Craw, A. (2013) ‘Deep Seabed Mining: An urgent wake-up call to protect our oceans’. Greenpeace. Doi: https://inhabitants-tv.org/feb2018_dsm_ep1/Greenpeace-Deep-Seabed-Mining.pdf

Coffey Natural Systems (2008) 'Environmental Impact Statement Executive Summary'. Doi: http://www.nautilusminerals.com/irm/content/pdf/environment-

reports/Environmental%20Impact%20Statement%20Executive%20Summary%20(English).p df

Dombrowsky, J. M. (2018) ‘Resource and Reserve Classification of a Solwara 1 type Deposit at an Arctic Mid Ocean Ridge’, (May).

(25)

24 Dover, C. L. van (2010) ‘Mining seafloor massive sulphides and biodiversity: what is at risk?’, ICES Journal of Marine Science, 68(2), pp. 341–348. doi: 10.1093/icesjms/fsq086.

FAO, (2002) ‘Profile PNG’.Source: http://www.fao.org/fi/oldsite/FCP/en/PNG/profile.htm Filer, C. and Gabriel, J. (2016) ‘How could Nautilus Minerals get a social licence to operate the world first deep sea mine ?’, Marine Policy. Elsevier, (October), pp. 1–7. doi:

10.1016/j.marpol.2016.12.001.

Grey, F. and Rosenbaum, H. (2015) ‘A critique of the nautilus minerals environmental and social benchmarking analysis of the solwara 1 project’, Deep Sea Mining Campaign, p. 16. Available at: www.deepseaminingoutofourdepth.org.

Hajer M.A. (2005) ‘Coalitions, Practices, and Meaning in Environmental Politics: From Acid Rain to BSE’. In: Howarth D., Torfing J. (eds) Discourse Theory in European Politics. Palgrave Macmillan, London.

Hajer, M. & Versteeg, W. (2005) ’ A decade of discourse analysis of environmental politics: Achievements, challenges, perspectives’. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning Volume 7, 2005. Issue 3: Does discourse matter? Discourse, power and institutions in the sustainability transition.

Hein, J. R. et al. (2013) ‘Deep-ocean mineral deposits as a source of critical metals for high- and green-technology applications: Comparison with land-based resources’, Ore Geology Reviews. Elsevier B.V., 51, pp. 1–14. doi: 10.1016/j.oregeorev.2012.12.001.

Hilson, G. (2002) ‘Hilson_2002_Land_Use_Conflicts’, Land Use Policy, 19, pp. 65–73. doi: 10.1016/S0264-8377(01)00043-6.

Hirwa, H. et al. (2019) ‘Evaluation of Soil Contamination in Mining Areas of Rwanda’, 5(1), pp. 9–15. doi: 10.11648/j.ajwse.20190501.12.

Huffpost, (2017), ‘Deep Sea Mining and the Controversial Solwara 1 Project in Papua New Guinea’. Source: https://www.huffpost.com/entry/deep-sea-mining-and-the-controversial-

solwara-1-in_b_5964dbe9e4b0deab7c646bb5?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29 vZ2xlL mNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAM-1DwDS416Vg0-ZlDoACRHV2FfAMQ

c0J6t7cVnY8v9iZSGzmWOfZainADigFLS3It7jLVPirtoe4EFVGuv7hWdleSvHlUJVpqOZiFCPicOG tXbLF fA9Mpo2T7S2o-45Qw3ke6gsC_UfUFb0TAG6WHMCGiFSf3v4fQ6wCi848

Human rights watch, (2019) 'Papua New Guinea'. Source: https://www.hrw.org/world- report/2019/country-chapters/papua-new-guinea. Retrieved: 13-05-2019.

(26)

25 Mining’s’, Sustainable Development Framework, (October), pp. 114–122.

International Seabed Authority (ISA) website. Retrieved 04-05-2019. Source: https://www.isa.org.jm/

Kemp, R. and Martens, P. (2007)’Sustainable development: how to manage something that is subjective and never can be acheived1? Sustainability: Science, Practice & Policy 3.2, 3(2). Available at : : http://sspp.proquest.com/static_content/vol3iss2/0703-007.kemp.pdf. Luick, J. (2012) ‘Physical Oceanographic Assessment of the Nautilus EIS for the Solwara 1 Project’, (November). Doi:

http://www.deepseaminingoutofourdepth.org/wp-content/uploads/EIS-Review- FINAL-low-res.pdf

Martine, G. and Alves, J. E. D. (2015) ‘Economy, society and environment in the 21st century: Three pillars or trilemma of sustainability? ’, Revista Brasileira de Estudos de Populacao, 32(3), pp. 433– 459. doi: 10.1590/S0102-3098201500000027.

Miljutina, D.; Miljutinaa, M.; Arbizua, P.; Galéron, J. (2011) ’ Deep-sea nematode

assemblage has not recovered 26 years after experimental mining of polymetallic nodules (Clarion-Clipperton Fracture Zone, Tropical Eastern Pacific)’. Deep Sea Research Part I: Oceanographic Research Papers August 2011, Volume 58, Issue 8, Pages 885-897 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.dsr.2011.06.003

Miller, K. A. et al. (2018) ‘An Overview of Seabed Mining Including the Current State

ofDevelopment, Environmental Impacts, and Knowledge Gaps’, Frontiers in Marine Science, 4(January 2018). doi: 10.3389/fmars.2017.00418.

Moskvitch K., 2018. ‘Deep sea mining could save humanity from climate change disaster. But at what cost?’ Wired. Source:https://www.wired.co.uk/article/deep-sea-mining-about-to-take-off Nautilus Minerals, PNG. Retrieved: 16-05-2019.

Orhan, G. (2006) ‘The politics of risk perception in Turkey: Discourse coalitions in the case of the Bergama gold mine dispute’, Policy and Politics, 34(4), pp. 691–710. doi:

10.1332/030557306778553123.

Ottery, C. (2010) ' Papua New Guinea gives green light to deep-sea mineral mine'. The Guardian. Source: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2010/oct/21/papua-new-guinea-mine

Page, R. (2018) ‘An Overview of Chinese Policy, Activity & Strategic Interests Relating to Deep Sea Mining in the Pacific’, p. 42.

Rosenbaum, H. (2016) ‘The Socio-Political and Regulatory Context for Sea Bed Mining in Papua New Guinea’, Deep Sea Mining Campaign. Available at:

(27)

26 http://www.deepseaminingoutofourdepth.org/wp-content/uploads/DSMC-PNG-Report-on-Deep- Sea-Mining.pdf.

Singh, P. K. and Singh, R. S. (2016) ‘Environmental and Social Impacts of Mining and Their Mitigation’, (September).

SPREP, (2015) ‘Understanding and Applying the Precautionary Principle to Deep Sea Minerals Mining in the Pacific Islands Region: A Socio-cultural and Legal Approach’. Source: https://www.sprep.org/publications/understanding-and-applying-the-precautionary-principle-to- deep-sea-minerals-mining-in-the-pacific-islands-region-a-socio-cultural-and-legal-approach

SSSA, (2013) ’ Why is Soil Important? ‘. Source: https://soils.org/files/science-policy/sssa- marketing-2013.pdf

Steiner, R. (2009) ‘Independent Review of the Environmental Impact Statement for the proposed Nautilus Minerals Solwara 1 Seabed Mining Project , Papua New Guinea’, pp. 1– 27.

Tunnicliffe V., Embley R., Holden J.,Butterfield D., Massoth G., Juniper K.,(1997) ‘Biological colonization of new hydrothermal vents following an eruption on Juan de Fuca Ridge’. Deep Sea Research Part I: Oceanographic Research Papers, Volume 44, Issues 9–10,Pages 1627-1644, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0967-0637(97)00041-1.

United Nations, Department of Economic and Social affairs (2017) ‘World population projected to reach 9.7 billion by 2050’ source:

http://www.un.org/en/development/desa/news/population/2015-report.html UN, (1982) ‘World Charter for Nature’. Doi:

https://www.un.org/documents/ga/res/37/a37r007.htm UN, (2015) ‘World population prospects’.

Source:https://esa.un.org/unpd/wpp/publications/files/key_findings_wpp_2015.pdf World Bank, (2019) ‘The World Bank In Papua New Guinea’. Source:

https://www.worldbank.org/en/country/png/overview

World Commission on Environment and Development. (1987). Our common future. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

WWF (2019), ‘Life out of the Sun’, Source:

(28)

27 Yestolifenotomining, (2019) ’21 reasons not to mine copper in intag, ecuador’. Source: http://www.yestolifenotomining.org/21-reasons-not-to-mine-copper-in-intag-ecuador/. Retrieved 5-05-2019.