IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jresou/v3y2014i1p123-134d32917.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Social and Environmental Impact of the Rare Earth Industries

Author

Listed:
  • Saleem H. Ali

    (Centre for Social Responsibility in Mining, Sustainable Minerals Institute, The University of Queensland, St Lucia, QLD 4072, Australia)

Abstract

The use of rare earth elements in various technologies continues to grow despite some alternatives being found for particular uses. Given a history of ecological concerns about pollution from rare earth mines, particularly in China, there are growing social and environmental concerns about the growth of the mining and mineral processing in this sector. This is best exemplified by the recent social and environmental conflict surrounding the development of the Lynas Advanced Materials Plant (LAMP) in Kuantan, Malaysia which led to international activism and claims of environmental and social injustice. This paper analyses the structure of environmental and social conflicts surrounding rare earth minerals and opportunities for improving the social and environmental performance of the sector. Many of these elements are used for green technologies. Opportunities exist that offer a more circular supply chain following industrial ecological principles through which reuse and recycling of the materials can provide a means of mitigating social and environmental conflicts in this sector. In addition, public engagement processes that recognize community concerns about radiation, and transparent scientifically predicated decision-making through an appropriate governance structure within regulatory organizations are also presented.

Suggested Citation

  • Saleem H. Ali, 2014. "Social and Environmental Impact of the Rare Earth Industries," Resources, MDPI, vol. 3(1), pages 1-12, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jresou:v:3:y:2014:i:1:p:123-134:d:32917
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2079-9276/3/1/123/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2079-9276/3/1/123/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Choi, Sungyeol & Jun, Eunju & Hwang, IlSoon & Starz, Anne & Mazour, Tom & Chang, SoonHeung & Burkart, Alex R., 2009. "Fourteen lessons learned from the successful nuclear power program of the Republic of Korea," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(12), pages 5494-5508, December.
    2. Reza Najem, G. & Voyce, L.K., 1990. "Health effects of a thorium waste disposal site," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 80(4), pages 478-480.
    3. Valentine, Scott Victor & Sovacool, Benjamin K., 2010. "The socio-political economy of nuclear power development in Japan and South Korea," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(12), pages 7971-7979, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Erika Machacek & Jessika Luth Richter & Ruth Lane, 2017. "Governance and Risk–Value Constructions in Closing Loops of Rare Earth Elements in Global Value Chains," Resources, MDPI, vol. 6(4), pages 1-25, October.
    2. Häberle, Philip Christoph, 2023. "Discussion of automotive trends and implications for German OEMs," Junior Management Science (JUMS), Junior Management Science e. V., vol. 8(4), pages 955-992.
    3. York R. Smith & Pankaj Kumar & John D. McLennan, 2017. "On the Extraction of Rare Earth Elements from Geothermal Brines," Resources, MDPI, vol. 6(3), pages 1-16, August.
    4. Elshkaki, Ayman, 2023. "The implications of material and energy efficiencies for the climate change mitigation potential of global energy transition scenarios," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 267(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Qingchang Li & Seungkook Roh & Jin Won Lee, 2020. "Segmenting the South Korean Public According to Their Preferred Direction for Electricity Mix Reform," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-17, October.
    2. Kwak, Kiho & Yoon, Hyungseok (David), 2020. "Unpacking transnational industry legitimacy dynamics, windows of opportunity, and latecomers’ catch-up in complex product systems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(4).
    3. Huang, Gillan Chi-Lun & Chen, Rung-Yi & Park, Byung-Bae, 2021. "Democratic innovations as a party tool: A comparative analysis of nuclear energy public participation in Taiwan and South Korea," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 153(C).
    4. Poortinga, Wouter & Aoyagi, Midori & Pidgeon, Nick F., 2013. "Public perceptions of climate change and energy futures before and after the Fukushima accident: A comparison between Britain and Japan," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 1204-1211.
    5. Ismail Abdallah & Hamed Alhosin & Mohamed Belarabi & Sanae Chaouki & Nousseiba Mahmoud & Jad Tayah, 2024. "A Pan-Asian Energy Transition? The New Rationale for Decarbonization Policies in the World’s Largest Energy Exporting Countries: A Case Study of Qatar and Other GCC Countries," Energies, MDPI, vol. 17(15), pages 1-30, July.
    6. Lovering, Jessica R. & Yip, Arthur & Nordhaus, Ted, 2016. "Historical construction costs of global nuclear power reactors," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 371-382.
    7. Valentine, Scott Victor, 2014. "The socio-political economy of electricity generation in China," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 32(C), pages 416-429.
    8. Eunjung Lim, 2021. "A Comparative Study of Power Mixes for Green Growth: How South Korea and Japan See Nuclear Energy Differently," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(18), pages 1-15, September.
    9. Lee, You-Kyung, 2020. "Sustainability of nuclear energy in Korea: From the users’ perspective," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 147(C).
    10. Mignacca, B. & Locatelli, G., 2020. "Economics and finance of Small Modular Reactors: A systematic review and research agenda," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    11. Sirin, Selahattin Murat, 2010. "An assessment of Turkey's nuclear energy policy in light of South Korea's nuclear experience," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(10), pages 6145-6152, October.
    12. Adrian Rinscheid & Burkard Eberlein & Patrick Emmenegger & Volker Schneider, 2020. "Why do junctures become critical? Political discourse, agency, and joint belief shifts in comparative perspective," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 14(4), pages 653-673, October.
    13. Daphne Ngar-yin Mah & Darren Man-wai Cheung, 2020. "Conceptualizing Niche–Regime Dynamics of Energy Transitions from a Political Economic Perspective: Insights from Community-Led Urban Solar in Seoul," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-28, June.
    14. repec:diw:diwwpp:dp1811 is not listed on IDEAS
    15. Valentine, Scott Victor & Sovacool, Benjamin K., 2019. "Energy transitions and mass publics: Manipulating public perception and ideological entrenchment in Japanese nuclear power policy," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 295-304.
    16. Wang, Bing & Kocaoglu, Dundar F. & Daim, Tugrul U. & Yang, Jiting, 2010. "A decision model for energy resource selection in China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(11), pages 7130-7141, November.
    17. Dalla Valle, Alessandra & Furlan, Claudia, 2014. "Diffusion of nuclear energy in some developing countries," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 143-153.
    18. Lindley, Ben & Roulstone, Tony & Locatelli, Giorgio & Rooney, Matt, 2023. "Can fusion energy be cost-competitive and commercially viable? An analysis of magnetically confined reactors," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 177(C).
    19. Beatriz Ferreira & Carla Curado & Mírian Oliveira, 2022. "The Contribution of Knowledge Management to Human Resource Development: a Systematic and Integrative Literature Review," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 13(3), pages 2319-2347, September.
    20. Roh, Seungkook & Lee, Jin Won, 2018. "Differentiated effects of risk perception dimensions on nuclear power acceptance in South Korea," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 727-735.
    21. Ngar-yin Mah, Daphne & Hills, Peter, 2014. "Participatory governance for energy policy-making: A case study of the UK nuclear consultation in 2007," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 340-351.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jresou:v:3:y:2014:i:1:p:123-134:d:32917. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.