Title: Exploring the Origins of “Social License to Operate” in the Mining Sector: Perspectives from Governance and Sustainability Theories
Author/Institution: Jeffrey Prno & D. Scott Slocombe, University of Waterloo
Publication Year: 2012
Why Social License Emerged Beyond Formal Regulation
Prno and Slocombe’s 2012 article provides one of the earliest systematic explanations of how the concept of social license to operate (SLO) emerged in the mining sector. The authors argue that SLO developed in response to declining public trust in traditional regulatory systems governing resource development. While governments historically granted the formal permits required for mining operations, communities increasingly began asserting their own authority to influence whether projects could proceed. Within this context, SLO is conceptualized not as a legal approval but as a dynamic form of social acceptance, grounded in trust, transparency, and perceived fairness in the relationship between companies and stakeholders.
From Regulatory Compliance to Governance Networks
The study situates SLO within broader theories of environmental governance and sustainability. Prno and Slocombe explain that contemporary mining projects operate within complex governance networks involving governments, corporations, local communities, civil society organizations, and international actors. In such environments, regulatory compliance alone cannot ensure project stability. Instead, companies must actively cultivate relationships with stakeholders through dialogue, participatory processes, and credible commitments to environmental and social responsibility. The authors therefore interpret SLO as a governance mechanism that reflects evolving expectations around accountability and shared decision-making.
Implications for Mining Legitimacy and Stakeholder Governance
Prno and Slocombe’s framework highlights that long-term access to mineral resources increasingly depends on maintaining institutional legitimacy in the eyes of affected communities. Mining operations that fail to address stakeholder expectations risk conflict, project delays, or reputational damage that can undermine economic viability. Their analysis anticipates the growing importance of stakeholder engagement strategies, community partnerships, and transparent governance structures in the extractive sector. In today’s context, where critical minerals and energy transition projects face heightened public scrutiny— their work remains central to understanding how social legitimacy shapes the durability of the mining industry’s license to operate.