Abstract Australian mining developments cause indirect economic impacts on nearby communities leading to poor health and wellbeing of local residents. Economic instability is a recognised social determinant of health (SDoH); however, SDoHs are rarely considered adequately in Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs). This research aimed to determine the extent economic impacts as a SDoH are considered in three Environmental Impact Statements (EISs) of mining projects in the New South Wales, Australia. We adopted an exploratory case study design following Yin (2012). Three cases in New South Wales, Australia, were purposively sampled as being of concern to the local community who had sought legal advice about the content of the EIS (although not necessarily for health reasons). Two were open cut mines: Watermark located in the Liverpool Plains and Warkworth Continuation in the Hunter Valley Region. The third is a comparative case – the underground Mandalong Southern Extension located in Lake Macquarie. We adapted a health-focused EIA coding framework to investigate how economic indicators as SDoH were explicitly mentioned in EISs and applied this to the three cases. Economic indicators as SDoH were rarely considered. There was a greater focus on population characteristics rather than the potential economic impacts of the mining projects on the communities. Causal association of economic determinants and health outcomes were insufficiently reported compared to best practice, and health data were not used to inform assessments. Despite two EISs – Warkworth Continuation and Watermark – associating some economic indicators to health outcomes, impacts were not adequately discussed when compared to the known literature on economic impacts of mines. Our findings show that the three EISs were inadequately utilised to determine economic impacts of mining projects on the health and wellbeing of local communities. The evidence base linking economic impacts of mines to health is underdeveloped, which compromises assessing the quality of economic coverage in EISs. EIA scoping should enable sufficient inclusion of broader determinants of health using appropriate methodology, and the economic-focused content of EISs should be subject to rigorous peer-review process to fully inform government approvals for projects. Our methods lend themselves to research in other contexts to investigate the quality of EIAs.

中文翻译：

---

采矿项目对当地社区的经济影响，作为健康的社会决定因素：环境影响报告的文件分析

摘要 澳大利亚矿业开发对附近社区造成间接经济影响，导致当地居民的健康和福祉不佳。经济不稳定是公认的健康社会决定因素 (SDoH)；然而，在环境影响评估 (EIA) 中很少充分考虑 SDoH。本研究旨在确定澳大利亚新南威尔士州采矿项目的三个环境影响报告 (EIS) 中考虑的 SDoH 的经济影响程度。我们采用了尹 (2012) 之后的探索性案例研究设计。澳大利亚新南威尔士州的三个案例被有目的地抽样，因为当地社区曾就 EIS 的内容寻求法律建议（尽管不一定出于健康原因）。两个是露天矿：水印位于利物浦平原和猎人谷地区的沃克沃斯延续区。第三个是比较案例——位于麦觉理湖的地下曼达隆南延线。我们采用了以健康为重点的 EIA 编码框架，以调查 EIS 中如何明确提及 SDoH 等经济指标，并将其应用于三个案例。很少考虑作为 SDoH 的经济指标。人们更加关注人口特征，而不是采矿项目对社区的潜在经济影响。与最佳实践相比，经济决定因素和健康结果之间的因果关系没有得到充分报告，健康数据也没有用于评估。尽管两个 EIS——Warkworth Continuation 和 Watermark——将一些经济指标与健康结果联系起来，与已知的关于矿山经济影响的文献相比，没有充分讨论影响。我们的研究结果表明，这三个 EIS 没有被充分利用来确定采矿项目对当地社区健康和福祉的经济影响。将矿山的经济影响与健康联系起来的证据基础还不完善，这影响了对 EIS 经济覆盖质量的评估。EIA 范围界定应能够使用适当的方法充分纳入更广泛的健康决定因素，并且 EIS 以经济为重点的内容应经过严格的同行审查程序，以充分告知政府对项目的批准。我们的方法适用于其他背景下的研究，以调查 EIA 的质量。