MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

ESG mapping of the Australian mining sector – The state of play on mobilising spatial datasets for decision making

2025· article· en· W4409841193 on OpenAlex
Éléonore Lèbre, Karol Czarnota, Stuart D.C. Walsh, Marcus Haynes, Natasha Ufer, Laura J. Sonter, Rachakonda Sreekar, Pascal Bolz, Nevenka Bulovic, Claire M. Côte, Nadja C. Kunz, Steven Micklethwaite, Stephen Northey, Louisa Rochford, Richard Schodde, Benjamin J. Seligmann, Kathryn Sturman

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueResources Policy · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMining and Resource Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersPredictive Mineral Discovery Cooperative Research CentreAustralian Research CouncilUniversity of Queensland
KeywordsState (computer science)BusinessEnvironmental planningEnvironmental resource managementComputer scienceGeographyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The global energy transition will drive increased demand for a broad range of mined minerals. Australia is well positioned to support the global energy transition, given its mature mining sector and rich and diverse mineral resources. The potential growth in the mining sector represents an economic opportunity, however, navigating the associated environmental, social, and governance (ESG) risks remains a challenge. A step towards improved ESG credentials across the Australian mining sector is for mine developers, regulators, communities, investors and other industry stakeholders to be capable of integrating diverse types of ESG data into decision-making processes. This paper establishes the foundations for applying ESG mapping, a research technique that mobilises spatial data to analyse and compare extractive locations in terms of factors relevant to mining and exploration, at the scale of Australia. To do so, the paper first critically reviews 33 spatial ESG datasets available at national scale across six main themes: people, land uses, water resources, extreme events, nature conservation, and governance. The paper then provides two proof-of-concept applications of ESG mapping to the Australian mining context and draws on these preliminary applications to propose a program of research aiming to fully utilise this technique to inform decision makers. • ESG mapping analyses and compares extractive locations across large scales. • The paper critically reviews 33 spatial ESG datasets available at the scale of Australia. • It identifies steps to using ESG mapping as a decision-support tool and provides two proof-of-concept applications. • One application tests the overlap between land tenure and mining project delays. • The second application aggregates ESG datasets into a composite measure of vulnerability.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.615
Threshold uncertainty score0.360

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.262 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it